Southampton Tory opposition leaders say they will take legal action if Labour bosses publish information about Government cuts on the council website

Daily Echo: Council leader Simon Letts said Southampton was being 'hammered' by the Government Council leader Simon Letts said Southampton was being 'hammered' by the Government

CIVIC chiefs in Southampton could face legal action if they attempt to put “political propaganda” on the council’s website and email bulletins.

Labour city council bosses wanted to publish information about the cut in Government funding to the city since the Coalition took power.

They were thwarted at a recent council meeting when the mayor ruled the plans were “out of order”.

But they say they may put forward another motion later in the year, and Tory opposition leaders say they will take legal action against the council if they go ahead with the plan.

Labour council leader Simon Letts had put forward the plans, saying Southampton was being “hammered” by central Government.

He says the city council has seen a £148 per person cut in funding since the Coalition came to power in 2010, compared to £28 per person in Winchester, a more affluent Conservative authority.

His proposal was to put that information on the council’s website and send it out to residents signed up to the council’s Stay Connected email bulletin.

Daily Echo: Tory opposition leader Royston Smith

Tory leader Royston Smith has challenged Labour plans

But following complaints from Tory opposition leader Royston Smith that it would be a misuse of public resources for “political propaganda”, city mayor Ivan White, a Conservative, ruled it out of order.

Cllr Smith said: “In attempting to use public resources to send a political message they are attempting to behave like a dictator in a banana republic. Whatever next, no elections?

“If they had been allowed to continue we would have taken legal action against the council for malpractice and we will do so if this is approved at a later meeting.”

He said the city had only seen its grants reduced by 28 per cent since the Coalition came to power, in comparison with 43 per cent at Hampshire County Council and 47 per cent at Winchester City Council, as a result of grants which have been handed out for specific projects.

Cllr Letts said: “We are trying to show that Southampton has been particularly badly hit by cuts in comparison with other areas of Hampshire.”

Comments (50)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:17am Sat 5 Apr 14

aldermoorboy says...

Well done Royston for fighting this biased information.
Well done Royston for fighting this biased information. aldermoorboy
  • Score: -2

8:10am Sat 5 Apr 14

SotonGreen says...

There will be an accurate per capita cut figure it is hard to see how publishing it is political propaganda it is just a fact. The Tories want their cake and eat it they claim credit at national level for tackling deficit, why run scared at local level of the consequences ?
There will be an accurate per capita cut figure it is hard to see how publishing it is political propaganda it is just a fact. The Tories want their cake and eat it they claim credit at national level for tackling deficit, why run scared at local level of the consequences ? SotonGreen
  • Score: 16

8:22am Sat 5 Apr 14

skeptik says...

Which pocket the money comes out of is neither here (local taxes or national) nor there all costings should be published if they are factual how can that be biased? We are told savings are being made - well let us see them listed where and why. The word bias is bandied about a lot today, usually in an attempt to cover up facts.
Which pocket the money comes out of is neither here (local taxes or national) nor there all costings should be published if they are factual how can that be biased? We are told savings are being made - well let us see them listed where and why. The word bias is bandied about a lot today, usually in an attempt to cover up facts. skeptik
  • Score: 8

8:44am Sat 5 Apr 14

FoysCornerBoy says...

What this story fails to mention is the disgraceful manner in which the Mayor was pressurized by his fellow conservative councillors at the last Council meeting to rule out a full debate on this important issue.

I understand that Simon Letts had discussed the wording of the proposed motion with the Council's solicitor to make sure that it was above board. The text of this motion was - in accordance with the law - made available to the public and all members of the Council (including Royston Smith) seven days before the Council meeting.

On the Monday before the Council meeting all the Conservative councillors (including the mayor) on the Council held a meeting to discuss their position on the items on the agenda - including the motion in the name of Simon Letts.

Immediately before the Council meeting the mayor was briefed on the business to be discussed.

At no point was the legality of the motion to be be publicly debated ever called into question. Until that is at the very point at which the motion was to be discussed when Royston Smith suddenly discovered a legal problem. He - with the backing of his fellow conservative councillors - put pressure on the mayor who then ruled the motion out of order.

Something is not right here and I fear that the ramifications of this sorry of affairs exposes significant weaknesses in the Council's constitution.
What this story fails to mention is the disgraceful manner in which the Mayor was pressurized by his fellow conservative councillors at the last Council meeting to rule out a full debate on this important issue. I understand that Simon Letts had discussed the wording of the proposed motion with the Council's solicitor to make sure that it was above board. The text of this motion was - in accordance with the law - made available to the public and all members of the Council (including Royston Smith) seven days before the Council meeting. On the Monday before the Council meeting all the Conservative councillors (including the mayor) on the Council held a meeting to discuss their position on the items on the agenda - including the motion in the name of Simon Letts. Immediately before the Council meeting the mayor was briefed on the business to be discussed. At no point was the legality of the motion to be be publicly debated ever called into question. Until that is at the very point at which the motion was to be discussed when Royston Smith suddenly discovered a legal problem. He - with the backing of his fellow conservative councillors - put pressure on the mayor who then ruled the motion out of order. Something is not right here and I fear that the ramifications of this sorry of affairs exposes significant weaknesses in the Council's constitution. FoysCornerBoy
  • Score: 15

8:45am Sat 5 Apr 14

loosehead says...

Postera above are asking how's this being biased?
Here's how. Only showing the cuts since the coalition came to power yet not showing the cuts implemented by Labour.
This City took a £25million cut in money in the last year of a Labour Government as did most Southern areas in an attempt by Labour to win Northern votes.
Will Labour (council) make this a level playing field & show no matter who was in power this city would have faced these level of cuts? or will they try to use only the latest cuts as an attempt to win votes before the local elections?
Postera above are asking how's this being biased? Here's how. Only showing the cuts since the coalition came to power yet not showing the cuts implemented by Labour. This City took a £25million cut in money in the last year of a Labour Government as did most Southern areas in an attempt by Labour to win Northern votes. Will Labour (council) make this a level playing field & show no matter who was in power this city would have faced these level of cuts? or will they try to use only the latest cuts as an attempt to win votes before the local elections? loosehead
  • Score: -4

8:56am Sat 5 Apr 14

SpikeFangio says...

aldermoorboy wrote:
Well done Royston for fighting this biased information.
One obvious comment deserves another. If Smith had announced plans (don't kid yourself he would have jumped at the chance as well) to introduce similar tactics then Labourites would be planted their flags on high.
Smith, if you care to recall, along with your Labour "friends", was just as guilty and probably worse with slurs and spinning the opposition. During the "reign of Royston" there was continual propaganda slurring being thrown around coming from the blue camp. Pot kettle black... Its a shame because the job in hand was to manage he city and not to abuse the elected office as an attempt to become an MP. His only goal. Any elected council in Southampton will, and always has, struggled due to recent unfair cuts from government. But getting back to the "email in question", I often have propaganda from all sides posted through my door which ends up in the recycle bin. This is obviously a good thing to do with paper. Many people, I would presume as I would be one of them, welcome further choices of communication. If I could opt out of the postal rubbish I could sign up for the email rubbish.
Freedom of communication,
Bring on Roystons Democratic Coalition Banana Republic.... Dictatorship.... Banana republic is a political science term for a politically unstable country whose economy is largely dependent on exporting a limited-resource product, e.g. bananas. It typically has stratified social classes, including a large, impoverished working class and a ruling plutocracy of business, political, and military elites; this politico-economic oligarchy controls the primary-sector productions to exploit the country's economy, just in case you need clarification. Yes I pasted it......
[quote][p][bold]aldermoorboy[/bold] wrote: Well done Royston for fighting this biased information.[/p][/quote]One obvious comment deserves another. If Smith had announced plans (don't kid yourself he would have jumped at the chance as well) to introduce similar tactics then Labourites would be planted their flags on high. Smith, if you care to recall, along with your Labour "friends", was just as guilty and probably worse with slurs and spinning the opposition. During the "reign of Royston" there was continual propaganda slurring being thrown around coming from the blue camp. Pot kettle black... Its a shame because the job in hand was to manage he city and not to abuse the elected office as an attempt to become an MP. His only goal. Any elected council in Southampton will, and always has, struggled due to recent unfair cuts from government. But getting back to the "email in question", I often have propaganda from all sides posted through my door which ends up in the recycle bin. This is obviously a good thing to do with paper. Many people, I would presume as I would be one of them, welcome further choices of communication. If I could opt out of the postal rubbish I could sign up for the email rubbish. Freedom of communication, Bring on Roystons Democratic Coalition Banana Republic.... Dictatorship.... Banana republic is a political science term for a politically unstable country whose economy is largely dependent on exporting a limited-resource product, e.g. bananas. It typically has stratified social classes, including a large, impoverished working class and a ruling plutocracy of business, political, and military elites; this politico-economic oligarchy controls the primary-sector productions to exploit the country's economy, just in case you need clarification. Yes I pasted it...... SpikeFangio
  • Score: -3

9:00am Sat 5 Apr 14

The Watcher says...

I must say I don't agree with suppressing the truth, so as long as these figures are accurate, then I see no reason why any local authority shouldn't be allowed to publish them to demonstrate how much money they receive (from all sources).
.
They then of course should publish how it is spent!
.
This is surely one way in which the electorate can judge the performance (or not) of their Council.
.
As someone else has already mentioned, this demonstrates the dilemma of national politicians bringing the country's economic position under control (and well done to the Coalition for being brave on this) and local politicians having to face the reality of what this mans at street level.
.
Once again Cllr Smith would appear to want his cake and eat it, and his suppression of the truth of how this City has been affected is a very poor idea.
I must say I don't agree with suppressing the truth, so as long as these figures are accurate, then I see no reason why any local authority shouldn't be allowed to publish them to demonstrate how much money they receive (from all sources). . They then of course should publish how it is spent! . This is surely one way in which the electorate can judge the performance (or not) of their Council. . As someone else has already mentioned, this demonstrates the dilemma of national politicians bringing the country's economic position under control (and well done to the Coalition for being brave on this) and local politicians having to face the reality of what this mans at street level. . Once again Cllr Smith would appear to want his cake and eat it, and his suppression of the truth of how this City has been affected is a very poor idea. The Watcher
  • Score: 10

9:38am Sat 5 Apr 14

Lone Ranger. says...

Oh dear Cllr Smith ....... Finding it difficult to accept someone stating the TRUTH about the Tory led Government and its effect on the people of this City ........ Shame on you
.
After all ........ You carry out your propaganda via the Echo
Oh dear Cllr Smith ....... Finding it difficult to accept someone stating the TRUTH about the Tory led Government and its effect on the people of this City ........ Shame on you . After all ........ You carry out your propaganda via the Echo Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 4

11:12am Sat 5 Apr 14

Jesta-a-View says...

Isn't Royston priceless?

Talk about putting your size 10 right in it.

It is out there now Royston so no one is going to care whether it's on the council website or not.

People will wonder though why it is you are making such a song and dance about the publishing of figures that we are all entitled to know about.

Sometimes it is better to say nothing.

This Royston, is one of those times!
Isn't Royston priceless? Talk about putting your size 10 right in it. It is out there now Royston so no one is going to care whether it's on the council website or not. People will wonder though why it is you are making such a song and dance about the publishing of figures that we are all entitled to know about. Sometimes it is better to say nothing. This Royston, is one of those times! Jesta-a-View
  • Score: 11

11:14am Sat 5 Apr 14

loosehead says...

Before Labour supporters see this as a way to attack the Tories please answer this. Have not Ed Balls & the Labour party said that they to would have implemented cuts but not as severe straight away but would last until our childrens children grow up as they also intended to borrow more?
So it's take the medicine now & get better or take it until you & your children die so why are a local authority who knew before the local elections trying to score points by announcing cuts by the government?
This has nothing about being open to the public as if Labour were being open they would have told the voters the truth before those elections as the planned cut in government monies were there for all to see & this council took less of a cut than the Tories had planned for?
This is another case of a financially,planning chaotic council that wants to shift the blame for their ineptitude elsewhere nothing more & nothing less.
Before Labour supporters see this as a way to attack the Tories please answer this. Have not Ed Balls & the Labour party said that they to would have implemented cuts but not as severe straight away but would last until our childrens children grow up as they also intended to borrow more? So it's take the medicine now & get better or take it until you & your children die so why are a local authority who knew before the local elections trying to score points by announcing cuts by the government? This has nothing about being open to the public as if Labour were being open they would have told the voters the truth before those elections as the planned cut in government monies were there for all to see & this council took less of a cut than the Tories had planned for? This is another case of a financially,planning chaotic council that wants to shift the blame for their ineptitude elsewhere nothing more & nothing less. loosehead
  • Score: -8

11:23am Sat 5 Apr 14

Jesta-a-View says...

loosehead wrote:
Before Labour supporters see this as a way to attack the Tories please answer this. Have not Ed Balls & the Labour party said that they to would have implemented cuts but not as severe straight away but would last until our childrens children grow up as they also intended to borrow more?
So it's take the medicine now & get better or take it until you & your children die so why are a local authority who knew before the local elections trying to score points by announcing cuts by the government?
This has nothing about being open to the public as if Labour were being open they would have told the voters the truth before those elections as the planned cut in government monies were there for all to see & this council took less of a cut than the Tories had planned for?
This is another case of a financially,planning chaotic council that wants to shift the blame for their ineptitude elsewhere nothing more & nothing less.
It is hardly about Party Politics is it?

It is about transparency concerning the level of Government cuts, their affects on the city and the fact we are entitled to know about these things and SHOULD be hearing about them from those who represent us, left, right or otherwise.

In shouting "Politcal Foul" Royston has brought more attention on this issue than there would have be if he had just kept quiet about it.

But then what can you expect from a Politician?

Most are hardly blessed with good judgement are they?
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Before Labour supporters see this as a way to attack the Tories please answer this. Have not Ed Balls & the Labour party said that they to would have implemented cuts but not as severe straight away but would last until our childrens children grow up as they also intended to borrow more? So it's take the medicine now & get better or take it until you & your children die so why are a local authority who knew before the local elections trying to score points by announcing cuts by the government? This has nothing about being open to the public as if Labour were being open they would have told the voters the truth before those elections as the planned cut in government monies were there for all to see & this council took less of a cut than the Tories had planned for? This is another case of a financially,planning chaotic council that wants to shift the blame for their ineptitude elsewhere nothing more & nothing less.[/p][/quote]It is hardly about Party Politics is it? It is about transparency concerning the level of Government cuts, their affects on the city and the fact we are entitled to know about these things and SHOULD be hearing about them from those who represent us, left, right or otherwise. In shouting "Politcal Foul" Royston has brought more attention on this issue than there would have be if he had just kept quiet about it. But then what can you expect from a Politician? Most are hardly blessed with good judgement are they? Jesta-a-View
  • Score: 3

11:26am Sat 5 Apr 14

SotonGreen says...

I am no supporter of Labour and even I can see publishing these figures are in the public interest. Austerity may be necessary but it comes at a cost and we have a right to know what that cost is.
I am no supporter of Labour and even I can see publishing these figures are in the public interest. Austerity may be necessary but it comes at a cost and we have a right to know what that cost is. SotonGreen
  • Score: 11

11:47am Sat 5 Apr 14

Lone Ranger. says...

SotonGreen wrote:
I am no supporter of Labour and even I can see publishing these figures are in the public interest. Austerity may be necessary but it comes at a cost and we have a right to know what that cost is.
How many more times will Cllr Smith threaten some sort of legal action against the council .......... And may i also ask ... Who pays fir it.
.
Well it wont be Cllr Smith or any of his Tory chums in the council.
.
It wont be the Tory party.
.
No ...... it will be the likes of EVERY taxpayer in Southampton ....... it would come from the Council funds.
.
Now some of you may be happy chucking away this money but i am sure that the majority wont be ........ When will the ego and arrogance of this man ever show signs of coming to and end ....... Hopefully no later than May next year
[quote][p][bold]SotonGreen[/bold] wrote: I am no supporter of Labour and even I can see publishing these figures are in the public interest. Austerity may be necessary but it comes at a cost and we have a right to know what that cost is.[/p][/quote]How many more times will Cllr Smith threaten some sort of legal action against the council .......... And may i also ask ... Who pays fir it. . Well it wont be Cllr Smith or any of his Tory chums in the council. . It wont be the Tory party. . No ...... it will be the likes of EVERY taxpayer in Southampton ....... it would come from the Council funds. . Now some of you may be happy chucking away this money but i am sure that the majority wont be ........ When will the ego and arrogance of this man ever show signs of coming to and end ....... Hopefully no later than May next year Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

12:15pm Sat 5 Apr 14

Paramjit Bahia says...

As a lay person I have no idea of legality of this situation, but as a Gandhian and socialist I believe in morality. So on moral ground in my view it is the duty of the Leader of the Council to provide as much factual information to us the people of Southampton as can possibly be disclosed.

Facts should me made available without doing Mandelson to the figures.

Cllr. Letts and his NuLabourite colleagues have comfortable majority in the Council Chamber, if they really believe in what they are saying and are men and women with principles, why couldn't they use their voting power to push through their seemingly good idea. If the Tory Mayor was throwing his weight around they had the power to pass a vote of no confidence in him and to remove him from the office. Why they have not done that?

As far as info about the scale of reduction in financial help to local councils and their destructive impact on our services is concerned, even those Tories who are honest enough are fully aware. So it is difficult to understand why Cllr. Smith led Conservative Group, ( which when in power had wasted plenty of public resources on union bashing) is objecting to Council trying to pass on info to the public.

A while back the Council had agreed to a motion of Cllr. Letts that there should be a campaign against central government reducing funding for councils. With that policy of Council already in place, how could NuLabourites have allowed the Mayor and the Tories get away with blocking info on same subject to be displayed on Council's website?

Or could it be that Cllr. Letts and co have their own game plan, pretend to be open and honest with public but then do nothing because of obstructionist Tories?

My suspicion is based on how few months ago Cllr. Letts and his NuLabourite colleagues shamelessly blocked a motion by Cllr. Keith Morrell and Cllr. Don Thomas proposing a meeting by all the Councils in our region to discuss and unite against cuts forced by the policies of the central government.

Interestingly at that meeting Tories did not object to good idea of Cllr. Keith Morrell.

As I have suggested many times, because successive central governments (Tories, Labour and current ConDem Coalition) have kept on creating problems for local authorities by reducing financial support while making them responsible for more and more issues, only way to sort the real problem is for all those who care to rise above political divides and unite to demand sufficient financial help for local councils.

Although when they are being honest (rarely) most of them agree that cause of the problem is the govt in London, but sadly in Southampton only Cllr. Don Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell are willing to stand by what they say and virtually all others simply pay lip service and love playing political ping pong.
As a lay person I have no idea of legality of this situation, but as a Gandhian and socialist I believe in morality. So on moral ground in my view it is the duty of the Leader of the Council to provide as much factual information to us the people of Southampton as can possibly be disclosed. Facts should me made available without doing Mandelson to the figures. Cllr. Letts and his NuLabourite colleagues have comfortable majority in the Council Chamber, if they really believe in what they are saying and are men and women with principles, why couldn't they use their voting power to push through their seemingly good idea. If the Tory Mayor was throwing his weight around they had the power to pass a vote of no confidence in him and to remove him from the office. Why they have not done that? As far as info about the scale of reduction in financial help to local councils and their destructive impact on our services is concerned, even those Tories who are honest enough are fully aware. So it is difficult to understand why Cllr. Smith led Conservative Group, ( which when in power had wasted plenty of public resources on union bashing) is objecting to Council trying to pass on info to the public. A while back the Council had agreed to a motion of Cllr. Letts that there should be a campaign against central government reducing funding for councils. With that policy of Council already in place, how could NuLabourites have allowed the Mayor and the Tories get away with blocking info on same subject to be displayed on Council's website? Or could it be that Cllr. Letts and co have their own game plan, pretend to be open and honest with public but then do nothing because of obstructionist Tories? My suspicion is based on how few months ago Cllr. Letts and his NuLabourite colleagues shamelessly blocked a motion by Cllr. Keith Morrell and Cllr. Don Thomas proposing a meeting by all the Councils in our region to discuss and unite against cuts forced by the policies of the central government. Interestingly at that meeting Tories did not object to good idea of Cllr. Keith Morrell. As I have suggested many times, because successive central governments (Tories, Labour and current ConDem Coalition) have kept on creating problems for local authorities by reducing financial support while making them responsible for more and more issues, only way to sort the real problem is for all those who care to rise above political divides and unite to demand sufficient financial help for local councils. Although when they are being honest (rarely) most of them agree that cause of the problem is the govt in London, but sadly in Southampton only Cllr. Don Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell are willing to stand by what they say and virtually all others simply pay lip service and love playing political ping pong. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: -3

1:55pm Sat 5 Apr 14

FoysCornerBoy says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
As a lay person I have no idea of legality of this situation, but as a Gandhian and socialist I believe in morality. So on moral ground in my view it is the duty of the Leader of the Council to provide as much factual information to us the people of Southampton as can possibly be disclosed.

Facts should me made available without doing Mandelson to the figures.

Cllr. Letts and his NuLabourite colleagues have comfortable majority in the Council Chamber, if they really believe in what they are saying and are men and women with principles, why couldn't they use their voting power to push through their seemingly good idea. If the Tory Mayor was throwing his weight around they had the power to pass a vote of no confidence in him and to remove him from the office. Why they have not done that?

As far as info about the scale of reduction in financial help to local councils and their destructive impact on our services is concerned, even those Tories who are honest enough are fully aware. So it is difficult to understand why Cllr. Smith led Conservative Group, ( which when in power had wasted plenty of public resources on union bashing) is objecting to Council trying to pass on info to the public.

A while back the Council had agreed to a motion of Cllr. Letts that there should be a campaign against central government reducing funding for councils. With that policy of Council already in place, how could NuLabourites have allowed the Mayor and the Tories get away with blocking info on same subject to be displayed on Council's website?

Or could it be that Cllr. Letts and co have their own game plan, pretend to be open and honest with public but then do nothing because of obstructionist Tories?

My suspicion is based on how few months ago Cllr. Letts and his NuLabourite colleagues shamelessly blocked a motion by Cllr. Keith Morrell and Cllr. Don Thomas proposing a meeting by all the Councils in our region to discuss and unite against cuts forced by the policies of the central government.

Interestingly at that meeting Tories did not object to good idea of Cllr. Keith Morrell.

As I have suggested many times, because successive central governments (Tories, Labour and current ConDem Coalition) have kept on creating problems for local authorities by reducing financial support while making them responsible for more and more issues, only way to sort the real problem is for all those who care to rise above political divides and unite to demand sufficient financial help for local councils.

Although when they are being honest (rarely) most of them agree that cause of the problem is the govt in London, but sadly in Southampton only Cllr. Don Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell are willing to stand by what they say and virtually all others simply pay lip service and love playing political ping pong.
Although I think you get your facts wrong in respect of Labour's role in the 2013 budget debate, Paramjit, I do agree that it was an affront to local democracy for the Council's (unelected) chief legal and finance officers to have misused their powers to prevent debate on the 'left' opposition's motion. It may well have been unlawful for the Council to adopt and seek to implement the alternative budget position as advanced by comrades Morrell and Thomas but I think the decision on this should have been left to the elected representatives of the people of Southampton.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: As a lay person I have no idea of legality of this situation, but as a Gandhian and socialist I believe in morality. So on moral ground in my view it is the duty of the Leader of the Council to provide as much factual information to us the people of Southampton as can possibly be disclosed. Facts should me made available without doing Mandelson to the figures. Cllr. Letts and his NuLabourite colleagues have comfortable majority in the Council Chamber, if they really believe in what they are saying and are men and women with principles, why couldn't they use their voting power to push through their seemingly good idea. If the Tory Mayor was throwing his weight around they had the power to pass a vote of no confidence in him and to remove him from the office. Why they have not done that? As far as info about the scale of reduction in financial help to local councils and their destructive impact on our services is concerned, even those Tories who are honest enough are fully aware. So it is difficult to understand why Cllr. Smith led Conservative Group, ( which when in power had wasted plenty of public resources on union bashing) is objecting to Council trying to pass on info to the public. A while back the Council had agreed to a motion of Cllr. Letts that there should be a campaign against central government reducing funding for councils. With that policy of Council already in place, how could NuLabourites have allowed the Mayor and the Tories get away with blocking info on same subject to be displayed on Council's website? Or could it be that Cllr. Letts and co have their own game plan, pretend to be open and honest with public but then do nothing because of obstructionist Tories? My suspicion is based on how few months ago Cllr. Letts and his NuLabourite colleagues shamelessly blocked a motion by Cllr. Keith Morrell and Cllr. Don Thomas proposing a meeting by all the Councils in our region to discuss and unite against cuts forced by the policies of the central government. Interestingly at that meeting Tories did not object to good idea of Cllr. Keith Morrell. As I have suggested many times, because successive central governments (Tories, Labour and current ConDem Coalition) have kept on creating problems for local authorities by reducing financial support while making them responsible for more and more issues, only way to sort the real problem is for all those who care to rise above political divides and unite to demand sufficient financial help for local councils. Although when they are being honest (rarely) most of them agree that cause of the problem is the govt in London, but sadly in Southampton only Cllr. Don Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell are willing to stand by what they say and virtually all others simply pay lip service and love playing political ping pong.[/p][/quote]Although I think you get your facts wrong in respect of Labour's role in the 2013 budget debate, Paramjit, I do agree that it was an affront to local democracy for the Council's (unelected) chief legal and finance officers to have misused their powers to prevent debate on the 'left' opposition's motion. It may well have been unlawful for the Council to adopt and seek to implement the alternative budget position as advanced by comrades Morrell and Thomas but I think the decision on this should have been left to the elected representatives of the people of Southampton. FoysCornerBoy
  • Score: 5

2:54pm Sat 5 Apr 14

IronLady2010 says...

Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about. IronLady2010
  • Score: -2

4:10pm Sat 5 Apr 14

loosehead says...

Jesta-a-View wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Before Labour supporters see this as a way to attack the Tories please answer this. Have not Ed Balls & the Labour party said that they to would have implemented cuts but not as severe straight away but would last until our childrens children grow up as they also intended to borrow more?
So it's take the medicine now & get better or take it until you & your children die so why are a local authority who knew before the local elections trying to score points by announcing cuts by the government?
This has nothing about being open to the public as if Labour were being open they would have told the voters the truth before those elections as the planned cut in government monies were there for all to see & this council took less of a cut than the Tories had planned for?
This is another case of a financially,planning chaotic council that wants to shift the blame for their ineptitude elsewhere nothing more & nothing less.
It is hardly about Party Politics is it?

It is about transparency concerning the level of Government cuts, their affects on the city and the fact we are entitled to know about these things and SHOULD be hearing about them from those who represent us, left, right or otherwise.

In shouting "Politcal Foul" Royston has brought more attention on this issue than there would have be if he had just kept quiet about it.

But then what can you expect from a Politician?

Most are hardly blessed with good judgement are they?
So why didn't Labour shout about what they were going to do before the local elections as it was there for all to see ( government cuts)?
They had extra from business rates more than the tories had planned for they had £8million for weekly refuse so that's refuse collecting paid for so this Labour council are financially better off than the Tories had set in motion plans for.
Let's get it right this is just a way for Labour to try to shift the blame for their mismanagement of the city's finances coming up to the May elections nothing more & nothing less.
[quote][p][bold]Jesta-a-View[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Before Labour supporters see this as a way to attack the Tories please answer this. Have not Ed Balls & the Labour party said that they to would have implemented cuts but not as severe straight away but would last until our childrens children grow up as they also intended to borrow more? So it's take the medicine now & get better or take it until you & your children die so why are a local authority who knew before the local elections trying to score points by announcing cuts by the government? This has nothing about being open to the public as if Labour were being open they would have told the voters the truth before those elections as the planned cut in government monies were there for all to see & this council took less of a cut than the Tories had planned for? This is another case of a financially,planning chaotic council that wants to shift the blame for their ineptitude elsewhere nothing more & nothing less.[/p][/quote]It is hardly about Party Politics is it? It is about transparency concerning the level of Government cuts, their affects on the city and the fact we are entitled to know about these things and SHOULD be hearing about them from those who represent us, left, right or otherwise. In shouting "Politcal Foul" Royston has brought more attention on this issue than there would have be if he had just kept quiet about it. But then what can you expect from a Politician? Most are hardly blessed with good judgement are they?[/p][/quote]So why didn't Labour shout about what they were going to do before the local elections as it was there for all to see ( government cuts)? They had extra from business rates more than the tories had planned for they had £8million for weekly refuse so that's refuse collecting paid for so this Labour council are financially better off than the Tories had set in motion plans for. Let's get it right this is just a way for Labour to try to shift the blame for their mismanagement of the city's finances coming up to the May elections nothing more & nothing less. loosehead
  • Score: -6

4:12pm Sat 5 Apr 14

loosehead says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
SotonGreen wrote:
I am no supporter of Labour and even I can see publishing these figures are in the public interest. Austerity may be necessary but it comes at a cost and we have a right to know what that cost is.
How many more times will Cllr Smith threaten some sort of legal action against the council .......... And may i also ask ... Who pays fir it.
.
Well it wont be Cllr Smith or any of his Tory chums in the council.
.
It wont be the Tory party.
.
No ...... it will be the likes of EVERY taxpayer in Southampton ....... it would come from the Council funds.
.
Now some of you may be happy chucking away this money but i am sure that the majority wont be ........ When will the ego and arrogance of this man ever show signs of coming to and end ....... Hopefully no later than May next year
so when the Tories bought a vote of no confidence in Williams they weren't justified?
Wasn't he proven to be a liar? yet Labour backed him all the way why was that?
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SotonGreen[/bold] wrote: I am no supporter of Labour and even I can see publishing these figures are in the public interest. Austerity may be necessary but it comes at a cost and we have a right to know what that cost is.[/p][/quote]How many more times will Cllr Smith threaten some sort of legal action against the council .......... And may i also ask ... Who pays fir it. . Well it wont be Cllr Smith or any of his Tory chums in the council. . It wont be the Tory party. . No ...... it will be the likes of EVERY taxpayer in Southampton ....... it would come from the Council funds. . Now some of you may be happy chucking away this money but i am sure that the majority wont be ........ When will the ego and arrogance of this man ever show signs of coming to and end ....... Hopefully no later than May next year[/p][/quote]so when the Tories bought a vote of no confidence in Williams they weren't justified? Wasn't he proven to be a liar? yet Labour backed him all the way why was that? loosehead
  • Score: -2

4:16pm Sat 5 Apr 14

loosehead says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services? loosehead
  • Score: -2

4:25pm Sat 5 Apr 14

misbehaving says...

The Watcher wrote:
I must say I don't agree with suppressing the truth, so as long as these figures are accurate, then I see no reason why any local authority shouldn't be allowed to publish them to demonstrate how much money they receive (from all sources).
.
They then of course should publish how it is spent!
.
This is surely one way in which the electorate can judge the performance (or not) of their Council.
.
As someone else has already mentioned, this demonstrates the dilemma of national politicians bringing the country's economic position under control (and well done to the Coalition for being brave on this) and local politicians having to face the reality of what this mans at street level.
.
Once again Cllr Smith would appear to want his cake and eat it, and his suppression of the truth of how this City has been affected is a very poor idea.
Who says they are accurate.

Let all the partys put their arguments on the website or none
[quote][p][bold]The Watcher[/bold] wrote: I must say I don't agree with suppressing the truth, so as long as these figures are accurate, then I see no reason why any local authority shouldn't be allowed to publish them to demonstrate how much money they receive (from all sources). . They then of course should publish how it is spent! . This is surely one way in which the electorate can judge the performance (or not) of their Council. . As someone else has already mentioned, this demonstrates the dilemma of national politicians bringing the country's economic position under control (and well done to the Coalition for being brave on this) and local politicians having to face the reality of what this mans at street level. . Once again Cllr Smith would appear to want his cake and eat it, and his suppression of the truth of how this City has been affected is a very poor idea.[/p][/quote]Who says they are accurate. Let all the partys put their arguments on the website or none misbehaving
  • Score: 0

4:29pm Sat 5 Apr 14

IronLady2010 says...

misbehaving wrote:
The Watcher wrote:
I must say I don't agree with suppressing the truth, so as long as these figures are accurate, then I see no reason why any local authority shouldn't be allowed to publish them to demonstrate how much money they receive (from all sources).
.
They then of course should publish how it is spent!
.
This is surely one way in which the electorate can judge the performance (or not) of their Council.
.
As someone else has already mentioned, this demonstrates the dilemma of national politicians bringing the country's economic position under control (and well done to the Coalition for being brave on this) and local politicians having to face the reality of what this mans at street level.
.
Once again Cllr Smith would appear to want his cake and eat it, and his suppression of the truth of how this City has been affected is a very poor idea.
Who says they are accurate.

Let all the partys put their arguments on the website or none
No.
No party should use our Council website for their own political gain. It's an information source for residents of Southampton and shouldn't be used to score political party points.

Labour can use their own website to do this as can the other parties.
[quote][p][bold]misbehaving[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Watcher[/bold] wrote: I must say I don't agree with suppressing the truth, so as long as these figures are accurate, then I see no reason why any local authority shouldn't be allowed to publish them to demonstrate how much money they receive (from all sources). . They then of course should publish how it is spent! . This is surely one way in which the electorate can judge the performance (or not) of their Council. . As someone else has already mentioned, this demonstrates the dilemma of national politicians bringing the country's economic position under control (and well done to the Coalition for being brave on this) and local politicians having to face the reality of what this mans at street level. . Once again Cllr Smith would appear to want his cake and eat it, and his suppression of the truth of how this City has been affected is a very poor idea.[/p][/quote]Who says they are accurate. Let all the partys put their arguments on the website or none[/p][/quote]No. No party should use our Council website for their own political gain. It's an information source for residents of Southampton and shouldn't be used to score political party points. Labour can use their own website to do this as can the other parties. IronLady2010
  • Score: -1

4:30pm Sat 5 Apr 14

misbehaving says...

does anyone think letts and foyesboycorner would put the % cut on the website? They said Southampton had the biggest cut by Winchesters is far bigger so is hampshire council. Thats why its not allowed because they are not telling the truth

I thought councillors were supposed to put their views on leaflets not the council website.
does anyone think letts and foyesboycorner would put the % cut on the website? They said Southampton had the biggest cut by Winchesters is far bigger so is hampshire council. Thats why its not allowed because they are not telling the truth I thought councillors were supposed to put their views on leaflets not the council website. misbehaving
  • Score: -1

4:40pm Sat 5 Apr 14

IronLady2010 says...

loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money.

I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website.

But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?[/p][/quote]That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money. I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website. But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours. IronLady2010
  • Score: -1

4:40pm Sat 5 Apr 14

good-gosh says...

Is there anyone left who doesn’t know about the cuts? Although perhaps the Labour group could reminded everyone about exactly why the cuts are necessary. Like explaining that the treasury is determined to reverse the crippling loans that the previous government took out, so the next generation isn’t saddled with it.
Is there anyone left who doesn’t know about the cuts? Although perhaps the Labour group could reminded everyone about exactly why the cuts are necessary. Like explaining that the treasury is determined to reverse the crippling loans that the previous government took out, so the next generation isn’t saddled with it. good-gosh
  • Score: -1

5:12pm Sat 5 Apr 14

WalkingOnAWire says...

loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
Loosehead, a few days ago I pointed out to you that all councillors took a pay cut in Feb 2011 and there hasn't been an increased in their allowances since 2009. So you have no excuse for posting false information about 'wage rises'. Unless you have evidence. Let's see it.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?[/p][/quote]Loosehead, a few days ago I pointed out to you that all councillors took a pay cut in Feb 2011 and there hasn't been an increased in their allowances since 2009. So you have no excuse for posting false information about 'wage rises'. Unless you have evidence. Let's see it. WalkingOnAWire
  • Score: 3

5:30pm Sat 5 Apr 14

southy says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money.

I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website.

But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.
You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local.
Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?[/p][/quote]That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money. I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website. But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.[/p][/quote]You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local. Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at. southy
  • Score: -7

5:35pm Sat 5 Apr 14

IronLady2010 says...

southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money.

I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website.

But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.
You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local.
Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.
So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council?

Is that not a Political agenda?

Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?[/p][/quote]That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money. I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website. But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.[/p][/quote]You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local. Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.[/p][/quote]So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council? Is that not a Political agenda? Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included. IronLady2010
  • Score: -1

5:50pm Sat 5 Apr 14

skeptik says...

After 41 years of conservative party membership awoke one morning to clear thoughts. The party I supported is as bad as the other lot. Sick to the back teeth of falsehoods. Whichever party supported and many believe the one they support has the answers - well as I approach the biblical allotted span I ask why we are in this mess - again. We have had many recessions since 1945 and a look at the records might surprise. We elect a government in the main on how we are doing financially - we talk of the NHS and education - truth is it boils down to personal finances when in the polling booth. We had the absurdity of a Labour government under Blair stealing the ground from under John Majors feet and carrying out policies of free for all banking, runaway housing prices (not values) - business and the city loved the Labour party - they appear to have forgotten that now. The oddest point in all of this some still claim the new labour was socialist - that displays a knowledge of Daily Mail headlines and little of the facts. Truth is politics is attracting those with a PPE degree and very little life or work experience.
After 41 years of conservative party membership awoke one morning to clear thoughts. The party I supported is as bad as the other lot. Sick to the back teeth of falsehoods. Whichever party supported and many believe the one they support has the answers - well as I approach the biblical allotted span I ask why we are in this mess - again. We have had many recessions since 1945 and a look at the records might surprise. We elect a government in the main on how we are doing financially - we talk of the NHS and education - truth is it boils down to personal finances when in the polling booth. We had the absurdity of a Labour government under Blair stealing the ground from under John Majors feet and carrying out policies of free for all banking, runaway housing prices (not values) - business and the city loved the Labour party - they appear to have forgotten that now. The oddest point in all of this some still claim the new labour was socialist - that displays a knowledge of Daily Mail headlines and little of the facts. Truth is politics is attracting those with a PPE degree and very little life or work experience. skeptik
  • Score: -4

6:28pm Sat 5 Apr 14

Paramjit Bahia says...

FoysCornerBoy wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
As a lay person I have no idea of legality of this situation, but as a Gandhian and socialist I believe in morality. So on moral ground in my view it is the duty of the Leader of the Council to provide as much factual information to us the people of Southampton as can possibly be disclosed.

Facts should me made available without doing Mandelson to the figures.

Cllr. Letts and his NuLabourite colleagues have comfortable majority in the Council Chamber, if they really believe in what they are saying and are men and women with principles, why couldn't they use their voting power to push through their seemingly good idea. If the Tory Mayor was throwing his weight around they had the power to pass a vote of no confidence in him and to remove him from the office. Why they have not done that?

As far as info about the scale of reduction in financial help to local councils and their destructive impact on our services is concerned, even those Tories who are honest enough are fully aware. So it is difficult to understand why Cllr. Smith led Conservative Group, ( which when in power had wasted plenty of public resources on union bashing) is objecting to Council trying to pass on info to the public.

A while back the Council had agreed to a motion of Cllr. Letts that there should be a campaign against central government reducing funding for councils. With that policy of Council already in place, how could NuLabourites have allowed the Mayor and the Tories get away with blocking info on same subject to be displayed on Council's website?

Or could it be that Cllr. Letts and co have their own game plan, pretend to be open and honest with public but then do nothing because of obstructionist Tories?

My suspicion is based on how few months ago Cllr. Letts and his NuLabourite colleagues shamelessly blocked a motion by Cllr. Keith Morrell and Cllr. Don Thomas proposing a meeting by all the Councils in our region to discuss and unite against cuts forced by the policies of the central government.

Interestingly at that meeting Tories did not object to good idea of Cllr. Keith Morrell.

As I have suggested many times, because successive central governments (Tories, Labour and current ConDem Coalition) have kept on creating problems for local authorities by reducing financial support while making them responsible for more and more issues, only way to sort the real problem is for all those who care to rise above political divides and unite to demand sufficient financial help for local councils.

Although when they are being honest (rarely) most of them agree that cause of the problem is the govt in London, but sadly in Southampton only Cllr. Don Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell are willing to stand by what they say and virtually all others simply pay lip service and love playing political ping pong.
Although I think you get your facts wrong in respect of Labour's role in the 2013 budget debate, Paramjit, I do agree that it was an affront to local democracy for the Council's (unelected) chief legal and finance officers to have misused their powers to prevent debate on the 'left' opposition's motion. It may well have been unlawful for the Council to adopt and seek to implement the alternative budget position as advanced by comrades Morrell and Thomas but I think the decision on this should have been left to the elected representatives of the people of Southampton.
I was not referring to the Budget Meeting at which Cllr. Keith Morrell and Cllr. Don Thomas were not allowed to put forward their budget by certain NuLabour Mayor named Burk. Thus depriving two elected representatives of the people their rights. Of course others also had their rights, so could have voted against the proposals of Keith and Don, but Burke in my view abused power of chain around his neck, while hiding behind the skirts of so called officers.

In fact I was mentioning the motion proposed by Cllr. Keith Morrell and Cllr. Don Thomas, proposed few months ago, which was basicaly asking for arranging a meeting of representatives of councils in the region to discuss issues of cuts and central government's role and also invite not any left winger but NuLabour's own front bench MP Hillary Benn to explain what his party will do about financing local government if they win next election.

Although what Cllrs. Morrell and Thomas were suggesting was very similar to what Cllr. Letts had done when he was not the Leader of the Council, whole of unprincipled NuLabour Group along with LibDems not only attacked Don and Keith for their sticking to Labour values or socialism they heavily amended the motion and to their collective shame even deleted suggestion to invite NuLabour's own Hillary Benn.

That kind of childish behaviour of the NuLabour Group led by Letts has left me with the impression that they are only interested in making anti Tory noises but have no intention of creating a united platform for securing better financial help from central government.

I suggest you check the records of Council meetings to see the exact wording of motions. And analyse those without NuLabour glasses or blinkers.
[quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: As a lay person I have no idea of legality of this situation, but as a Gandhian and socialist I believe in morality. So on moral ground in my view it is the duty of the Leader of the Council to provide as much factual information to us the people of Southampton as can possibly be disclosed. Facts should me made available without doing Mandelson to the figures. Cllr. Letts and his NuLabourite colleagues have comfortable majority in the Council Chamber, if they really believe in what they are saying and are men and women with principles, why couldn't they use their voting power to push through their seemingly good idea. If the Tory Mayor was throwing his weight around they had the power to pass a vote of no confidence in him and to remove him from the office. Why they have not done that? As far as info about the scale of reduction in financial help to local councils and their destructive impact on our services is concerned, even those Tories who are honest enough are fully aware. So it is difficult to understand why Cllr. Smith led Conservative Group, ( which when in power had wasted plenty of public resources on union bashing) is objecting to Council trying to pass on info to the public. A while back the Council had agreed to a motion of Cllr. Letts that there should be a campaign against central government reducing funding for councils. With that policy of Council already in place, how could NuLabourites have allowed the Mayor and the Tories get away with blocking info on same subject to be displayed on Council's website? Or could it be that Cllr. Letts and co have their own game plan, pretend to be open and honest with public but then do nothing because of obstructionist Tories? My suspicion is based on how few months ago Cllr. Letts and his NuLabourite colleagues shamelessly blocked a motion by Cllr. Keith Morrell and Cllr. Don Thomas proposing a meeting by all the Councils in our region to discuss and unite against cuts forced by the policies of the central government. Interestingly at that meeting Tories did not object to good idea of Cllr. Keith Morrell. As I have suggested many times, because successive central governments (Tories, Labour and current ConDem Coalition) have kept on creating problems for local authorities by reducing financial support while making them responsible for more and more issues, only way to sort the real problem is for all those who care to rise above political divides and unite to demand sufficient financial help for local councils. Although when they are being honest (rarely) most of them agree that cause of the problem is the govt in London, but sadly in Southampton only Cllr. Don Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell are willing to stand by what they say and virtually all others simply pay lip service and love playing political ping pong.[/p][/quote]Although I think you get your facts wrong in respect of Labour's role in the 2013 budget debate, Paramjit, I do agree that it was an affront to local democracy for the Council's (unelected) chief legal and finance officers to have misused their powers to prevent debate on the 'left' opposition's motion. It may well have been unlawful for the Council to adopt and seek to implement the alternative budget position as advanced by comrades Morrell and Thomas but I think the decision on this should have been left to the elected representatives of the people of Southampton.[/p][/quote]I was not referring to the Budget Meeting at which Cllr. Keith Morrell and Cllr. Don Thomas were not allowed to put forward their budget by certain NuLabour Mayor named Burk. Thus depriving two elected representatives of the people their rights. Of course others also had their rights, so could have voted against the proposals of Keith and Don, but Burke in my view abused power of chain around his neck, while hiding behind the skirts of so called officers. In fact I was mentioning the motion proposed by Cllr. Keith Morrell and Cllr. Don Thomas, proposed few months ago, which was basicaly asking for arranging a meeting of representatives of councils in the region to discuss issues of cuts and central government's role and also invite not any left winger but NuLabour's own front bench MP Hillary Benn to explain what his party will do about financing local government if they win next election. Although what Cllrs. Morrell and Thomas were suggesting was very similar to what Cllr. Letts had done when he was not the Leader of the Council, whole of unprincipled NuLabour Group along with LibDems not only attacked Don and Keith for their sticking to Labour values or socialism they heavily amended the motion and to their collective shame even deleted suggestion to invite NuLabour's own Hillary Benn. That kind of childish behaviour of the NuLabour Group led by Letts has left me with the impression that they are only interested in making anti Tory noises but have no intention of creating a united platform for securing better financial help from central government. I suggest you check the records of Council meetings to see the exact wording of motions. And analyse those without NuLabour glasses or blinkers. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: -2

7:25pm Sat 5 Apr 14

soton-mike80 says...

There are a couple of things that I would like to point out. When I was working at the council, the council's communications department cannot distribute any information that could be construed as motivating political bias. The council has to remain politically neutral in every message they deliver.

If a political party want to distribute a politically charged message through the media, then they must do so using their own resources, not the City Council's.

The Conservative administration attempted to do this a number of times, as did the LibDems when Cllr Vinson was Leader... it is only natural that Labour also want to do it. BUT when the council does publish anything - it must be solely the facts of the message alone.

I reckon that we are not being told the full story here - otherwise the facts would have been published.
There are a couple of things that I would like to point out. When I was working at the council, the council's communications department cannot distribute any information that could be construed as motivating political bias. The council has to remain politically neutral in every message they deliver. If a political party want to distribute a politically charged message through the media, then they must do so using their own resources, not the City Council's. The Conservative administration attempted to do this a number of times, as did the LibDems when Cllr Vinson was Leader... it is only natural that Labour also want to do it. BUT when the council does publish anything - it must be solely the facts of the message alone. I reckon that we are not being told the full story here - otherwise the facts would have been published. soton-mike80
  • Score: 3

9:17pm Sat 5 Apr 14

loosehead says...

WalkingOnAWire wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
Loosehead, a few days ago I pointed out to you that all councillors took a pay cut in Feb 2011 and there hasn't been an increased in their allowances since 2009. So you have no excuse for posting false information about 'wage rises'. Unless you have evidence. Let's see it.
I said wage rises did I say Councillor wage rises? Did not Labour at the start of their reign increase the size of the cabinet by two ?
Weren't these two councillors going to see an increase in their pay?
At the time of the 5.5% pay cut the Tories & Liberals took Labour said some of it's councillors gave the equivalent to charity at no way did they say all of them took a pay cut.
If we're talking about honesty let's see all pay for all jobs in the council & let's see how much it cost us to restore that pay & how much with a yearly 1.9% pay rise those levels of pay increase so we can judge for ourselves if we think we're paying to much for the jobs?
After all we're the bankers who stump up the money to pay them aren't we?
So please give me that apology for you jumping to conclusions please.
[quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?[/p][/quote]Loosehead, a few days ago I pointed out to you that all councillors took a pay cut in Feb 2011 and there hasn't been an increased in their allowances since 2009. So you have no excuse for posting false information about 'wage rises'. Unless you have evidence. Let's see it.[/p][/quote]I said wage rises did I say Councillor wage rises? Did not Labour at the start of their reign increase the size of the cabinet by two ? Weren't these two councillors going to see an increase in their pay? At the time of the 5.5% pay cut the Tories & Liberals took Labour said some of it's councillors gave the equivalent to charity at no way did they say all of them took a pay cut. If we're talking about honesty let's see all pay for all jobs in the council & let's see how much it cost us to restore that pay & how much with a yearly 1.9% pay rise those levels of pay increase so we can judge for ourselves if we think we're paying to much for the jobs? After all we're the bankers who stump up the money to pay them aren't we? So please give me that apology for you jumping to conclusions please. loosehead
  • Score: -2

10:44pm Sat 5 Apr 14

southy says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money.

I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website.

But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.
You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local.
Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.
So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council?

Is that not a Political agenda?

Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.
What I am saying is that you publish public information where all can get at and if a web site makes it easier to do then you use it as 1 of the options to give the public the information that is all ready in public domain..
Make no mistake this information that Letts is on about is all ready can be read by the public its just that its not easy to get at, you need to go into town to the city center, so in reality all Letts is doing is making it more easier for people to read its not party politics it is what as all ready happening and still happening and the public should know what as been going on
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?[/p][/quote]That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money. I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website. But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.[/p][/quote]You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local. Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.[/p][/quote]So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council? Is that not a Political agenda? Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.[/p][/quote]What I am saying is that you publish public information where all can get at and if a web site makes it easier to do then you use it as 1 of the options to give the public the information that is all ready in public domain.. Make no mistake this information that Letts is on about is all ready can be read by the public its just that its not easy to get at, you need to go into town to the city center, so in reality all Letts is doing is making it more easier for people to read its not party politics it is what as all ready happening and still happening and the public should know what as been going on southy
  • Score: -1

10:52pm Sat 5 Apr 14

southy says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money.

I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website.

But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.
You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local.
Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.
So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council?

Is that not a Political agenda?

Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.
This yes I do, it what as happen and still happening, this is not about party politics its about the truth what is going on between national government and local government and people must be informed, it do not give the Labour party any points over putting it on a web site its going to be just as damaging to Labour as it will be for the Torys, it will show that the Labour party as done nothing but to implement government cuts policy.
And this is not what people want they want a council who is strong enough to say no to national government
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?[/p][/quote]That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money. I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website. But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.[/p][/quote]You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local. Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.[/p][/quote]So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council? Is that not a Political agenda? Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.[/p][/quote]This yes I do, it what as happen and still happening, this is not about party politics its about the truth what is going on between national government and local government and people must be informed, it do not give the Labour party any points over putting it on a web site its going to be just as damaging to Labour as it will be for the Torys, it will show that the Labour party as done nothing but to implement government cuts policy. And this is not what people want they want a council who is strong enough to say no to national government southy
  • Score: -1

11:36pm Sat 5 Apr 14

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money.

I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website.

But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.
You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local.
Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.
So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council?

Is that not a Political agenda?

Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.
What I am saying is that you publish public information where all can get at and if a web site makes it easier to do then you use it as 1 of the options to give the public the information that is all ready in public domain..
Make no mistake this information that Letts is on about is all ready can be read by the public its just that its not easy to get at, you need to go into town to the city center, so in reality all Letts is doing is making it more easier for people to read its not party politics it is what as all ready happening and still happening and the public should know what as been going on
A strange reply from someone who refuses point blank to divulge any reference sources to back up his "facts"..
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?[/p][/quote]That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money. I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website. But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.[/p][/quote]You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local. Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.[/p][/quote]So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council? Is that not a Political agenda? Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.[/p][/quote]What I am saying is that you publish public information where all can get at and if a web site makes it easier to do then you use it as 1 of the options to give the public the information that is all ready in public domain.. Make no mistake this information that Letts is on about is all ready can be read by the public its just that its not easy to get at, you need to go into town to the city center, so in reality all Letts is doing is making it more easier for people to read its not party politics it is what as all ready happening and still happening and the public should know what as been going on[/p][/quote]A strange reply from someone who refuses point blank to divulge any reference sources to back up his "facts".. Torchie1
  • Score: 1

9:37am Sun 6 Apr 14

Paramjit Bahia says...

southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money.

I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website.

But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.
You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local.
Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.
So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council?

Is that not a Political agenda?

Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.
This yes I do, it what as happen and still happening, this is not about party politics its about the truth what is going on between national government and local government and people must be informed, it do not give the Labour party any points over putting it on a web site its going to be just as damaging to Labour as it will be for the Torys, it will show that the Labour party as done nothing but to implement government cuts policy.
And this is not what people want they want a council who is strong enough to say no to national government
Peter, The basic point you are trying to make is correct.

We the people have right to know the facts, that is if we want to or keep on pretending to be ostrich...... And it is the moral duty of The Council to provide as much information as possible without members of the public and media having to extract it through legal methods. ( as Echo had to do sometimes)

So YES Simon Letts led slippery NuLabour Group of the Council has very cleverly tried to pretend that they are being open and honest with the public. Which in all fairness has to be apperciated.

BUT the information they wanted to release (it is is in public domain already all one has to do is to look for it) through the website of Council is selective not the complete picture.

To most people it hardly matters how much or how little money other authorities are given by the central government (although same may not be the case with those who are not self centred and whose world stops at Chilworth round about) all they are interested in is their own services in the city.

I suspect the aim of Letts and co is to make people of Southampton believe that the government is treating people in Winchester etc better than them i.e. create us Vs them atmosphere. A confused situation in which people forget to say '"Hey NuLabour councillors we voted for you lot because you promised to not only be better than the Tories but also to protect our services and most vigorously campaign against unnecessary cuts (Cllr. Letts himself promised that when he spoke at meeting of TUSC, which I also attended.) but now in office you useless lot are proving to be no better than the Tories and instead of campaigning against the cruel policies of central govt you are implementing those with greatest possible enthusiasm. Why aren't you ashamed of yourself?"

And I am one of those who is also saying to the self serving unprincipled traitors of Labour the ruthless axemen and women led by Slippery Simon Letts "If Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell can stand by pledges given to public before elections why can't you lot?"
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?[/p][/quote]That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money. I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website. But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.[/p][/quote]You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local. Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.[/p][/quote]So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council? Is that not a Political agenda? Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.[/p][/quote]This yes I do, it what as happen and still happening, this is not about party politics its about the truth what is going on between national government and local government and people must be informed, it do not give the Labour party any points over putting it on a web site its going to be just as damaging to Labour as it will be for the Torys, it will show that the Labour party as done nothing but to implement government cuts policy. And this is not what people want they want a council who is strong enough to say no to national government[/p][/quote]Peter, The basic point you are trying to make is correct. We the people have right to know the facts, that is if we want to or keep on pretending to be ostrich...... And it is the moral duty of The Council to provide as much information as possible without members of the public and media having to extract it through legal methods. ( as Echo had to do sometimes) So YES Simon Letts led slippery NuLabour Group of the Council has very cleverly tried to pretend that they are being open and honest with the public. Which in all fairness has to be apperciated. BUT the information they wanted to release (it is is in public domain already all one has to do is to look for it) through the website of Council is selective not the complete picture. To most people it hardly matters how much or how little money other authorities are given by the central government (although same may not be the case with those who are not self centred and whose world stops at Chilworth round about) all they are interested in is their own services in the city. I suspect the aim of Letts and co is to make people of Southampton believe that the government is treating people in Winchester etc better than them i.e. create us Vs them atmosphere. A confused situation in which people forget to say '"Hey NuLabour councillors we voted for you lot because you promised to not only be better than the Tories but also to protect our services and most vigorously campaign against unnecessary cuts (Cllr. Letts himself promised that when he spoke at meeting of TUSC, which I also attended.) but now in office you useless lot are proving to be no better than the Tories and instead of campaigning against the cruel policies of central govt you are implementing those with greatest possible enthusiasm. Why aren't you ashamed of yourself?" And I am one of those who is also saying to the self serving unprincipled traitors of Labour the ruthless axemen and women led by Slippery Simon Letts "If Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell can stand by pledges given to public before elections why can't you lot?" Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: -1

10:17am Sun 6 Apr 14

loosehead says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money.

I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website.

But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.
You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local.
Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.
So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council?

Is that not a Political agenda?

Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.
This yes I do, it what as happen and still happening, this is not about party politics its about the truth what is going on between national government and local government and people must be informed, it do not give the Labour party any points over putting it on a web site its going to be just as damaging to Labour as it will be for the Torys, it will show that the Labour party as done nothing but to implement government cuts policy.
And this is not what people want they want a council who is strong enough to say no to national government
Peter, The basic point you are trying to make is correct.

We the people have right to know the facts, that is if we want to or keep on pretending to be ostrich...... And it is the moral duty of The Council to provide as much information as possible without members of the public and media having to extract it through legal methods. ( as Echo had to do sometimes)

So YES Simon Letts led slippery NuLabour Group of the Council has very cleverly tried to pretend that they are being open and honest with the public. Which in all fairness has to be apperciated.

BUT the information they wanted to release (it is is in public domain already all one has to do is to look for it) through the website of Council is selective not the complete picture.

To most people it hardly matters how much or how little money other authorities are given by the central government (although same may not be the case with those who are not self centred and whose world stops at Chilworth round about) all they are interested in is their own services in the city.

I suspect the aim of Letts and co is to make people of Southampton believe that the government is treating people in Winchester etc better than them i.e. create us Vs them atmosphere. A confused situation in which people forget to say '"Hey NuLabour councillors we voted for you lot because you promised to not only be better than the Tories but also to protect our services and most vigorously campaign against unnecessary cuts (Cllr. Letts himself promised that when he spoke at meeting of TUSC, which I also attended.) but now in office you useless lot are proving to be no better than the Tories and instead of campaigning against the cruel policies of central govt you are implementing those with greatest possible enthusiasm. Why aren't you ashamed of yourself?"

And I am one of those who is also saying to the self serving unprincipled traitors of Labour the ruthless axemen and women led by Slippery Simon Letts "If Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell can stand by pledges given to public before elections why can't you lot?"
But the cuts to services & jobs were known about by all Labour councillors & would be councillors before those local elections Williams actually said about them in an interview with a journalist in this paper then after a meeting with the unions he said he was misquoted.
It was & is part of the Labour manifesto so why did Thomas & Morrell stand as Labour candidates if they opposed cuts?
Surely they should have made their break & shouted about Labours cuts before those elections or didn't they think they'd get elected?
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?[/p][/quote]That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money. I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website. But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.[/p][/quote]You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local. Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.[/p][/quote]So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council? Is that not a Political agenda? Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.[/p][/quote]This yes I do, it what as happen and still happening, this is not about party politics its about the truth what is going on between national government and local government and people must be informed, it do not give the Labour party any points over putting it on a web site its going to be just as damaging to Labour as it will be for the Torys, it will show that the Labour party as done nothing but to implement government cuts policy. And this is not what people want they want a council who is strong enough to say no to national government[/p][/quote]Peter, The basic point you are trying to make is correct. We the people have right to know the facts, that is if we want to or keep on pretending to be ostrich...... And it is the moral duty of The Council to provide as much information as possible without members of the public and media having to extract it through legal methods. ( as Echo had to do sometimes) So YES Simon Letts led slippery NuLabour Group of the Council has very cleverly tried to pretend that they are being open and honest with the public. Which in all fairness has to be apperciated. BUT the information they wanted to release (it is is in public domain already all one has to do is to look for it) through the website of Council is selective not the complete picture. To most people it hardly matters how much or how little money other authorities are given by the central government (although same may not be the case with those who are not self centred and whose world stops at Chilworth round about) all they are interested in is their own services in the city. I suspect the aim of Letts and co is to make people of Southampton believe that the government is treating people in Winchester etc better than them i.e. create us Vs them atmosphere. A confused situation in which people forget to say '"Hey NuLabour councillors we voted for you lot because you promised to not only be better than the Tories but also to protect our services and most vigorously campaign against unnecessary cuts (Cllr. Letts himself promised that when he spoke at meeting of TUSC, which I also attended.) but now in office you useless lot are proving to be no better than the Tories and instead of campaigning against the cruel policies of central govt you are implementing those with greatest possible enthusiasm. Why aren't you ashamed of yourself?" And I am one of those who is also saying to the self serving unprincipled traitors of Labour the ruthless axemen and women led by Slippery Simon Letts "If Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell can stand by pledges given to public before elections why can't you lot?"[/p][/quote]But the cuts to services & jobs were known about by all Labour councillors & would be councillors before those local elections Williams actually said about them in an interview with a journalist in this paper then after a meeting with the unions he said he was misquoted. It was & is part of the Labour manifesto so why did Thomas & Morrell stand as Labour candidates if they opposed cuts? Surely they should have made their break & shouted about Labours cuts before those elections or didn't they think they'd get elected? loosehead
  • Score: -1

11:38am Sun 6 Apr 14

southy says...

Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money.

I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website.

But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.
You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local.
Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.
So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council?

Is that not a Political agenda?

Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.
What I am saying is that you publish public information where all can get at and if a web site makes it easier to do then you use it as 1 of the options to give the public the information that is all ready in public domain..
Make no mistake this information that Letts is on about is all ready can be read by the public its just that its not easy to get at, you need to go into town to the city center, so in reality all Letts is doing is making it more easier for people to read its not party politics it is what as all ready happening and still happening and the public should know what as been going on
A strange reply from someone who refuses point blank to divulge any reference sources to back up his "facts"..
The facts are at the council achieves now i have all ready said once where they are the rest is up to you to go and look, not every thing is on the web sites.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?[/p][/quote]That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money. I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website. But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.[/p][/quote]You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local. Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.[/p][/quote]So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council? Is that not a Political agenda? Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.[/p][/quote]What I am saying is that you publish public information where all can get at and if a web site makes it easier to do then you use it as 1 of the options to give the public the information that is all ready in public domain.. Make no mistake this information that Letts is on about is all ready can be read by the public its just that its not easy to get at, you need to go into town to the city center, so in reality all Letts is doing is making it more easier for people to read its not party politics it is what as all ready happening and still happening and the public should know what as been going on[/p][/quote]A strange reply from someone who refuses point blank to divulge any reference sources to back up his "facts"..[/p][/quote]The facts are at the council achieves now i have all ready said once where they are the rest is up to you to go and look, not every thing is on the web sites. southy
  • Score: -1

11:53am Sun 6 Apr 14

Paramjit Bahia says...

loosehead wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money.

I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website.

But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.
You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local.
Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.
So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council?

Is that not a Political agenda?

Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.
This yes I do, it what as happen and still happening, this is not about party politics its about the truth what is going on between national government and local government and people must be informed, it do not give the Labour party any points over putting it on a web site its going to be just as damaging to Labour as it will be for the Torys, it will show that the Labour party as done nothing but to implement government cuts policy.
And this is not what people want they want a council who is strong enough to say no to national government
Peter, The basic point you are trying to make is correct.

We the people have right to know the facts, that is if we want to or keep on pretending to be ostrich...... And it is the moral duty of The Council to provide as much information as possible without members of the public and media having to extract it through legal methods. ( as Echo had to do sometimes)

So YES Simon Letts led slippery NuLabour Group of the Council has very cleverly tried to pretend that they are being open and honest with the public. Which in all fairness has to be apperciated.

BUT the information they wanted to release (it is is in public domain already all one has to do is to look for it) through the website of Council is selective not the complete picture.

To most people it hardly matters how much or how little money other authorities are given by the central government (although same may not be the case with those who are not self centred and whose world stops at Chilworth round about) all they are interested in is their own services in the city.

I suspect the aim of Letts and co is to make people of Southampton believe that the government is treating people in Winchester etc better than them i.e. create us Vs them atmosphere. A confused situation in which people forget to say '"Hey NuLabour councillors we voted for you lot because you promised to not only be better than the Tories but also to protect our services and most vigorously campaign against unnecessary cuts (Cllr. Letts himself promised that when he spoke at meeting of TUSC, which I also attended.) but now in office you useless lot are proving to be no better than the Tories and instead of campaigning against the cruel policies of central govt you are implementing those with greatest possible enthusiasm. Why aren't you ashamed of yourself?"

And I am one of those who is also saying to the self serving unprincipled traitors of Labour the ruthless axemen and women led by Slippery Simon Letts "If Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell can stand by pledges given to public before elections why can't you lot?"
But the cuts to services & jobs were known about by all Labour councillors & would be councillors before those local elections Williams actually said about them in an interview with a journalist in this paper then after a meeting with the unions he said he was misquoted.
It was & is part of the Labour manifesto so why did Thomas & Morrell stand as Labour candidates if they opposed cuts?
Surely they should have made their break & shouted about Labours cuts before those elections or didn't they think they'd get elected?
I have no idea when Cllr. Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell contested elections in Coxford and WON, about which NuLabour manifesto in Southampton at that time contained the statement that when in power NuLabour will not protect services. If you have that document is your possession please send the photo copy to me.

I have the feeling that in your eagerness to post 'whatever' you may have overlooked very important detail, and with greatest respect for your ability of making plenty of comments on this site I am concerned you may have tied yourself in your own knot.

Although I am posting this without checking the date when statement you have attributed to former councillor Williams, I have strong feeling that was not made before Cllr. Don Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell were elected but long time after that.

Although in case of Cllr. Sally Spicer the situation may be different. But it could be argued that statement to press (even if accepted to be true) by any indvidual does not become manifesto. For example promise by Cameron to an innocent husky dog made in front of international media can not be called manifesto of Conservative Party.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?[/p][/quote]That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money. I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website. But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.[/p][/quote]You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local. Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.[/p][/quote]So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council? Is that not a Political agenda? Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.[/p][/quote]This yes I do, it what as happen and still happening, this is not about party politics its about the truth what is going on between national government and local government and people must be informed, it do not give the Labour party any points over putting it on a web site its going to be just as damaging to Labour as it will be for the Torys, it will show that the Labour party as done nothing but to implement government cuts policy. And this is not what people want they want a council who is strong enough to say no to national government[/p][/quote]Peter, The basic point you are trying to make is correct. We the people have right to know the facts, that is if we want to or keep on pretending to be ostrich...... And it is the moral duty of The Council to provide as much information as possible without members of the public and media having to extract it through legal methods. ( as Echo had to do sometimes) So YES Simon Letts led slippery NuLabour Group of the Council has very cleverly tried to pretend that they are being open and honest with the public. Which in all fairness has to be apperciated. BUT the information they wanted to release (it is is in public domain already all one has to do is to look for it) through the website of Council is selective not the complete picture. To most people it hardly matters how much or how little money other authorities are given by the central government (although same may not be the case with those who are not self centred and whose world stops at Chilworth round about) all they are interested in is their own services in the city. I suspect the aim of Letts and co is to make people of Southampton believe that the government is treating people in Winchester etc better than them i.e. create us Vs them atmosphere. A confused situation in which people forget to say '"Hey NuLabour councillors we voted for you lot because you promised to not only be better than the Tories but also to protect our services and most vigorously campaign against unnecessary cuts (Cllr. Letts himself promised that when he spoke at meeting of TUSC, which I also attended.) but now in office you useless lot are proving to be no better than the Tories and instead of campaigning against the cruel policies of central govt you are implementing those with greatest possible enthusiasm. Why aren't you ashamed of yourself?" And I am one of those who is also saying to the self serving unprincipled traitors of Labour the ruthless axemen and women led by Slippery Simon Letts "If Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell can stand by pledges given to public before elections why can't you lot?"[/p][/quote]But the cuts to services & jobs were known about by all Labour councillors & would be councillors before those local elections Williams actually said about them in an interview with a journalist in this paper then after a meeting with the unions he said he was misquoted. It was & is part of the Labour manifesto so why did Thomas & Morrell stand as Labour candidates if they opposed cuts? Surely they should have made their break & shouted about Labours cuts before those elections or didn't they think they'd get elected?[/p][/quote]I have no idea when Cllr. Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell contested elections in Coxford and WON, about which NuLabour manifesto in Southampton at that time contained the statement that when in power NuLabour will not protect services. If you have that document is your possession please send the photo copy to me. I have the feeling that in your eagerness to post 'whatever' you may have overlooked very important detail, and with greatest respect for your ability of making plenty of comments on this site I am concerned you may have tied yourself in your own knot. Although I am posting this without checking the date when statement you have attributed to former councillor Williams, I have strong feeling that was not made before Cllr. Don Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell were elected but long time after that. Although in case of Cllr. Sally Spicer the situation may be different. But it could be argued that statement to press (even if accepted to be true) by any indvidual does not become manifesto. For example promise by Cameron to an innocent husky dog made in front of international media can not be called manifesto of Conservative Party. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

12:34pm Sun 6 Apr 14

loosehead says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money.

I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website.

But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.
You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local.
Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.
So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council?

Is that not a Political agenda?

Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.
This yes I do, it what as happen and still happening, this is not about party politics its about the truth what is going on between national government and local government and people must be informed, it do not give the Labour party any points over putting it on a web site its going to be just as damaging to Labour as it will be for the Torys, it will show that the Labour party as done nothing but to implement government cuts policy.
And this is not what people want they want a council who is strong enough to say no to national government
Peter, The basic point you are trying to make is correct.

We the people have right to know the facts, that is if we want to or keep on pretending to be ostrich...... And it is the moral duty of The Council to provide as much information as possible without members of the public and media having to extract it through legal methods. ( as Echo had to do sometimes)

So YES Simon Letts led slippery NuLabour Group of the Council has very cleverly tried to pretend that they are being open and honest with the public. Which in all fairness has to be apperciated.

BUT the information they wanted to release (it is is in public domain already all one has to do is to look for it) through the website of Council is selective not the complete picture.

To most people it hardly matters how much or how little money other authorities are given by the central government (although same may not be the case with those who are not self centred and whose world stops at Chilworth round about) all they are interested in is their own services in the city.

I suspect the aim of Letts and co is to make people of Southampton believe that the government is treating people in Winchester etc better than them i.e. create us Vs them atmosphere. A confused situation in which people forget to say '"Hey NuLabour councillors we voted for you lot because you promised to not only be better than the Tories but also to protect our services and most vigorously campaign against unnecessary cuts (Cllr. Letts himself promised that when he spoke at meeting of TUSC, which I also attended.) but now in office you useless lot are proving to be no better than the Tories and instead of campaigning against the cruel policies of central govt you are implementing those with greatest possible enthusiasm. Why aren't you ashamed of yourself?"

And I am one of those who is also saying to the self serving unprincipled traitors of Labour the ruthless axemen and women led by Slippery Simon Letts "If Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell can stand by pledges given to public before elections why can't you lot?"
But the cuts to services & jobs were known about by all Labour councillors & would be councillors before those local elections Williams actually said about them in an interview with a journalist in this paper then after a meeting with the unions he said he was misquoted.
It was & is part of the Labour manifesto so why did Thomas & Morrell stand as Labour candidates if they opposed cuts?
Surely they should have made their break & shouted about Labours cuts before those elections or didn't they think they'd get elected?
I have no idea when Cllr. Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell contested elections in Coxford and WON, about which NuLabour manifesto in Southampton at that time contained the statement that when in power NuLabour will not protect services. If you have that document is your possession please send the photo copy to me.

I have the feeling that in your eagerness to post 'whatever' you may have overlooked very important detail, and with greatest respect for your ability of making plenty of comments on this site I am concerned you may have tied yourself in your own knot.

Although I am posting this without checking the date when statement you have attributed to former councillor Williams, I have strong feeling that was not made before Cllr. Don Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell were elected but long time after that.

Although in case of Cllr. Sally Spicer the situation may be different. But it could be argued that statement to press (even if accepted to be true) by any indvidual does not become manifesto. For example promise by Cameron to an innocent husky dog made in front of international media can not be called manifesto of Conservative Party.
The statement in this paper was before the local elections which saw Labour take power so those two were well aware of this councils intentions so could have resigned from the Labour party & either stood in council as independents or stood as independent candidates so if they were really against cuts why didn't they stand up & say about it before those elections?
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?[/p][/quote]That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money. I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website. But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.[/p][/quote]You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local. Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.[/p][/quote]So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council? Is that not a Political agenda? Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.[/p][/quote]This yes I do, it what as happen and still happening, this is not about party politics its about the truth what is going on between national government and local government and people must be informed, it do not give the Labour party any points over putting it on a web site its going to be just as damaging to Labour as it will be for the Torys, it will show that the Labour party as done nothing but to implement government cuts policy. And this is not what people want they want a council who is strong enough to say no to national government[/p][/quote]Peter, The basic point you are trying to make is correct. We the people have right to know the facts, that is if we want to or keep on pretending to be ostrich...... And it is the moral duty of The Council to provide as much information as possible without members of the public and media having to extract it through legal methods. ( as Echo had to do sometimes) So YES Simon Letts led slippery NuLabour Group of the Council has very cleverly tried to pretend that they are being open and honest with the public. Which in all fairness has to be apperciated. BUT the information they wanted to release (it is is in public domain already all one has to do is to look for it) through the website of Council is selective not the complete picture. To most people it hardly matters how much or how little money other authorities are given by the central government (although same may not be the case with those who are not self centred and whose world stops at Chilworth round about) all they are interested in is their own services in the city. I suspect the aim of Letts and co is to make people of Southampton believe that the government is treating people in Winchester etc better than them i.e. create us Vs them atmosphere. A confused situation in which people forget to say '"Hey NuLabour councillors we voted for you lot because you promised to not only be better than the Tories but also to protect our services and most vigorously campaign against unnecessary cuts (Cllr. Letts himself promised that when he spoke at meeting of TUSC, which I also attended.) but now in office you useless lot are proving to be no better than the Tories and instead of campaigning against the cruel policies of central govt you are implementing those with greatest possible enthusiasm. Why aren't you ashamed of yourself?" And I am one of those who is also saying to the self serving unprincipled traitors of Labour the ruthless axemen and women led by Slippery Simon Letts "If Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell can stand by pledges given to public before elections why can't you lot?"[/p][/quote]But the cuts to services & jobs were known about by all Labour councillors & would be councillors before those local elections Williams actually said about them in an interview with a journalist in this paper then after a meeting with the unions he said he was misquoted. It was & is part of the Labour manifesto so why did Thomas & Morrell stand as Labour candidates if they opposed cuts? Surely they should have made their break & shouted about Labours cuts before those elections or didn't they think they'd get elected?[/p][/quote]I have no idea when Cllr. Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell contested elections in Coxford and WON, about which NuLabour manifesto in Southampton at that time contained the statement that when in power NuLabour will not protect services. If you have that document is your possession please send the photo copy to me. I have the feeling that in your eagerness to post 'whatever' you may have overlooked very important detail, and with greatest respect for your ability of making plenty of comments on this site I am concerned you may have tied yourself in your own knot. Although I am posting this without checking the date when statement you have attributed to former councillor Williams, I have strong feeling that was not made before Cllr. Don Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell were elected but long time after that. Although in case of Cllr. Sally Spicer the situation may be different. But it could be argued that statement to press (even if accepted to be true) by any indvidual does not become manifesto. For example promise by Cameron to an innocent husky dog made in front of international media can not be called manifesto of Conservative Party.[/p][/quote]The statement in this paper was before the local elections which saw Labour take power so those two were well aware of this councils intentions so could have resigned from the Labour party & either stood in council as independents or stood as independent candidates so if they were really against cuts why didn't they stand up & say about it before those elections? loosehead
  • Score: -1

12:39pm Sun 6 Apr 14

loosehead says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers.

It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with.

By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level.

This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not.

We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.
I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?
That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money.

I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website.

But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.
You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local.
Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.
So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council?

Is that not a Political agenda?

Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.
This yes I do, it what as happen and still happening, this is not about party politics its about the truth what is going on between national government and local government and people must be informed, it do not give the Labour party any points over putting it on a web site its going to be just as damaging to Labour as it will be for the Torys, it will show that the Labour party as done nothing but to implement government cuts policy.
And this is not what people want they want a council who is strong enough to say no to national government
Peter, The basic point you are trying to make is correct.

We the people have right to know the facts, that is if we want to or keep on pretending to be ostrich...... And it is the moral duty of The Council to provide as much information as possible without members of the public and media having to extract it through legal methods. ( as Echo had to do sometimes)

So YES Simon Letts led slippery NuLabour Group of the Council has very cleverly tried to pretend that they are being open and honest with the public. Which in all fairness has to be apperciated.

BUT the information they wanted to release (it is is in public domain already all one has to do is to look for it) through the website of Council is selective not the complete picture.

To most people it hardly matters how much or how little money other authorities are given by the central government (although same may not be the case with those who are not self centred and whose world stops at Chilworth round about) all they are interested in is their own services in the city.

I suspect the aim of Letts and co is to make people of Southampton believe that the government is treating people in Winchester etc better than them i.e. create us Vs them atmosphere. A confused situation in which people forget to say '"Hey NuLabour councillors we voted for you lot because you promised to not only be better than the Tories but also to protect our services and most vigorously campaign against unnecessary cuts (Cllr. Letts himself promised that when he spoke at meeting of TUSC, which I also attended.) but now in office you useless lot are proving to be no better than the Tories and instead of campaigning against the cruel policies of central govt you are implementing those with greatest possible enthusiasm. Why aren't you ashamed of yourself?"

And I am one of those who is also saying to the self serving unprincipled traitors of Labour the ruthless axemen and women led by Slippery Simon Letts "If Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell can stand by pledges given to public before elections why can't you lot?"
But the cuts to services & jobs were known about by all Labour councillors & would be councillors before those local elections Williams actually said about them in an interview with a journalist in this paper then after a meeting with the unions he said he was misquoted.
It was & is part of the Labour manifesto so why did Thomas & Morrell stand as Labour candidates if they opposed cuts?
Surely they should have made their break & shouted about Labours cuts before those elections or didn't they think they'd get elected?
I have no idea when Cllr. Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell contested elections in Coxford and WON, about which NuLabour manifesto in Southampton at that time contained the statement that when in power NuLabour will not protect services. If you have that document is your possession please send the photo copy to me.

I have the feeling that in your eagerness to post 'whatever' you may have overlooked very important detail, and with greatest respect for your ability of making plenty of comments on this site I am concerned you may have tied yourself in your own knot.

Although I am posting this without checking the date when statement you have attributed to former councillor Williams, I have strong feeling that was not made before Cllr. Don Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell were elected but long time after that.

Although in case of Cllr. Sally Spicer the situation may be different. But it could be argued that statement to press (even if accepted to be true) by any indvidual does not become manifesto. For example promise by Cameron to an innocent husky dog made in front of international media can not be called manifesto of Conservative Party.
1,500 jobs need to go at city council, says Labour group leader

By Matt Smith »
THE leader of the Labour group in Southampton has revealed that up to 1,500 jobs would need to be axed to balance the council books.


Cllr Richard Williams
But Cllr Richard Williams has pledged his party would try to find alternatives if they seized power from the Tories.

He said the massive job cuts would be needed over the next four years whether there were pay cuts or not and condemned strikes by unions as not the way to settle a bitter seven-week dispute.

But Southampton City Council leader Cllr Royston Smith told the Daily Echo that these figures were “wildly exaggerated” and accused the Labour leader of scaremongering.

Cllr Williams blamed local government funding cuts of 27 per cent over the next four years and said Labour group strategists in Southampton were planning a much leaner council.

Tory council leaders claim that the council faces a choice between the controversial pay cuts, due to come into force tomorrow, or 400 job cuts over the next two years.

Council staff have been threatened with dismissal if they don't sign up to new contracts by tomorrow cutting their pay by up to 5.5 per cent. The council says 94 per cent of staff have already signed.

About 600 council workers will walk out on strike from tomorrow on what unions have dubbed "Armegeddon Day".

Cllr Williams said that after conversations with the chief executive, up to 1,500 job losses may be needed to plug a budget black hole over the next four years that council finance chiefs revealed this week had grown from £65m to at least £75m.

He said: “I’ve been very clear to the unions. There will be redundancies. If there is a change of administration there will be less people working for the council than today.”

He said while he opposed the “attack on staff terms and conditions” he added: “We’ve never supported the strike action.

“I don’t think strike action is the way forward. The staff suffer and the public suffer.”

He suggested a pay freeze and reduced hours in the short term could buy time to negotiate a settlement while structural changes were needed to the council in the longer term.

Cllr Williams said a council tax discount for pensioners, worth nearly £1m, would be scrapped, while more services could be merged with other councils on a “large scale” to cuts costs.

Other council departments such as communications could see its budget slashed or be merged with the fire, police or health service, he said, to create a Hampshire wide local authority PR team.

And he said he would explore how the council could generate new income, possibly through a commercial trading arm.

Cllr Smith said: “We always knew that if Labour were running the council they would cut hundreds, if not thousands of jobs and now we have it confirmed.

“His figures are wildly exaggerated and bear no resemblance to anything I have heard from the chief executive, and I have had many more meeting’s with him.”

Cllr Williams’ comments have been met with disappointment from Andy Straker, Unison regional organiser.

He said: “I am extremely disappointed by his reaction.

“If this is what he is planning on doing I would have thought he would be trying to sit down with the unions, discussing how to make these cuts, rather than doing what the Tories are doing and telling us what is happening and expect us to accept it.

“This is not the way forward.

“We won’t put up with another party replacing another who will tell our members what they are going to do.

“I am disappointed that he doesn’t support the strikes, what would his answer be for us to do, roll over and take it? We won’t do that and we never will, no matter who is running the council.”
here it is in black & White so they knew before those elections on what they were going to do.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Surely the Council website is a source of information for local Tax payers. It hardly matters at local level what cuts Winchester are being hit with. By all means publish our budget cuts and what services have been hit as a result as that's all we need to know at a local level. This way we, as the tax payer can see wether we feel you have made cuts in the right places or not. We are not Winchester or any other area, we are Southampton and that's what the website should be about.[/p][/quote]I wonder if they'll also include wage rises & cabinet posts(extra) into those figures so we can see how much we pay for limited services?[/p][/quote]That is what the Council should be doing anyway. Being transparent and honest about how they are spending our reduced money. I fully appreciate the figures are nicely tucked away in files somewhere on the website. But, if you want to show how the cuts are having an affect then show us what services you have chosen to hit and we can make our own decision as to who is right or wrong, no need for comparison to Winchester, that's Winchesters problem not ours.[/p][/quote]You will not get openness and transparency from the right wing, its never happen in the pass and will not happen in the future. If you knew what the right wing was up to you would never let them have the key to government national or local. Smithy do not want the people know what his council was up to and things like this will give an indication what was going on and is why he is objection to the information being put on the council web site, it is information that should be on the web site (its all ready been publish for people to read but not on a web site you got to go to the archives in the civic center and is why people should read every single public notice because it will give you info on how or where the full info is being stored for the public to read up on, so putting this info on the council web site would only make it a lot easier for people to get at.[/p][/quote]So you feel it is right to place an article on the Council website or by way of email comparing a Labour Council to a Conservative Council? Is that not a Political agenda? Surely each party should do this on their own political website. Residents of Southampton only want to know what is happening in our City on our website. The Party Politics shouldn't be included.[/p][/quote]This yes I do, it what as happen and still happening, this is not about party politics its about the truth what is going on between national government and local government and people must be informed, it do not give the Labour party any points over putting it on a web site its going to be just as damaging to Labour as it will be for the Torys, it will show that the Labour party as done nothing but to implement government cuts policy. And this is not what people want they want a council who is strong enough to say no to national government[/p][/quote]Peter, The basic point you are trying to make is correct. We the people have right to know the facts, that is if we want to or keep on pretending to be ostrich...... And it is the moral duty of The Council to provide as much information as possible without members of the public and media having to extract it through legal methods. ( as Echo had to do sometimes) So YES Simon Letts led slippery NuLabour Group of the Council has very cleverly tried to pretend that they are being open and honest with the public. Which in all fairness has to be apperciated. BUT the information they wanted to release (it is is in public domain already all one has to do is to look for it) through the website of Council is selective not the complete picture. To most people it hardly matters how much or how little money other authorities are given by the central government (although same may not be the case with those who are not self centred and whose world stops at Chilworth round about) all they are interested in is their own services in the city. I suspect the aim of Letts and co is to make people of Southampton believe that the government is treating people in Winchester etc better than them i.e. create us Vs them atmosphere. A confused situation in which people forget to say '"Hey NuLabour councillors we voted for you lot because you promised to not only be better than the Tories but also to protect our services and most vigorously campaign against unnecessary cuts (Cllr. Letts himself promised that when he spoke at meeting of TUSC, which I also attended.) but now in office you useless lot are proving to be no better than the Tories and instead of campaigning against the cruel policies of central govt you are implementing those with greatest possible enthusiasm. Why aren't you ashamed of yourself?" And I am one of those who is also saying to the self serving unprincipled traitors of Labour the ruthless axemen and women led by Slippery Simon Letts "If Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell can stand by pledges given to public before elections why can't you lot?"[/p][/quote]But the cuts to services & jobs were known about by all Labour councillors & would be councillors before those local elections Williams actually said about them in an interview with a journalist in this paper then after a meeting with the unions he said he was misquoted. It was & is part of the Labour manifesto so why did Thomas & Morrell stand as Labour candidates if they opposed cuts? Surely they should have made their break & shouted about Labours cuts before those elections or didn't they think they'd get elected?[/p][/quote]I have no idea when Cllr. Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell contested elections in Coxford and WON, about which NuLabour manifesto in Southampton at that time contained the statement that when in power NuLabour will not protect services. If you have that document is your possession please send the photo copy to me. I have the feeling that in your eagerness to post 'whatever' you may have overlooked very important detail, and with greatest respect for your ability of making plenty of comments on this site I am concerned you may have tied yourself in your own knot. Although I am posting this without checking the date when statement you have attributed to former councillor Williams, I have strong feeling that was not made before Cllr. Don Thomas and Cllr. Keith Morrell were elected but long time after that. Although in case of Cllr. Sally Spicer the situation may be different. But it could be argued that statement to press (even if accepted to be true) by any indvidual does not become manifesto. For example promise by Cameron to an innocent husky dog made in front of international media can not be called manifesto of Conservative Party.[/p][/quote]1,500 jobs need to go at city council, says Labour group leader By Matt Smith » THE leader of the Labour group in Southampton has revealed that up to 1,500 jobs would need to be axed to balance the council books. Cllr Richard Williams But Cllr Richard Williams has pledged his party would try to find alternatives if they seized power from the Tories. He said the massive job cuts would be needed over the next four years whether there were pay cuts or not and condemned strikes by unions as not the way to settle a bitter seven-week dispute. But Southampton City Council leader Cllr Royston Smith told the Daily Echo that these figures were “wildly exaggerated” and accused the Labour leader of scaremongering. Cllr Williams blamed local government funding cuts of 27 per cent over the next four years and said Labour group strategists in Southampton were planning a much leaner council. Tory council leaders claim that the council faces a choice between the controversial pay cuts, due to come into force tomorrow, or 400 job cuts over the next two years. Council staff have been threatened with dismissal if they don't sign up to new contracts by tomorrow cutting their pay by up to 5.5 per cent. The council says 94 per cent of staff have already signed. About 600 council workers will walk out on strike from tomorrow on what unions have dubbed "Armegeddon Day". Cllr Williams said that after conversations with the chief executive, up to 1,500 job losses may be needed to plug a budget black hole over the next four years that council finance chiefs revealed this week had grown from £65m to at least £75m. He said: “I’ve been very clear to the unions. There will be redundancies. If there is a change of administration there will be less people working for the council than today.” He said while he opposed the “attack on staff terms and conditions” he added: “We’ve never supported the strike action. “I don’t think strike action is the way forward. The staff suffer and the public suffer.” He suggested a pay freeze and reduced hours in the short term could buy time to negotiate a settlement while structural changes were needed to the council in the longer term. Cllr Williams said a council tax discount for pensioners, worth nearly £1m, would be scrapped, while more services could be merged with other councils on a “large scale” to cuts costs. Other council departments such as communications could see its budget slashed or be merged with the fire, police or health service, he said, to create a Hampshire wide local authority PR team. And he said he would explore how the council could generate new income, possibly through a commercial trading arm. Cllr Smith said: “We always knew that if Labour were running the council they would cut hundreds, if not thousands of jobs and now we have it confirmed. “His figures are wildly exaggerated and bear no resemblance to anything I have heard from the chief executive, and I have had many more meeting’s with him.” Cllr Williams’ comments have been met with disappointment from Andy Straker, Unison regional organiser. He said: “I am extremely disappointed by his reaction. “If this is what he is planning on doing I would have thought he would be trying to sit down with the unions, discussing how to make these cuts, rather than doing what the Tories are doing and telling us what is happening and expect us to accept it. “This is not the way forward. “We won’t put up with another party replacing another who will tell our members what they are going to do. “I am disappointed that he doesn’t support the strikes, what would his answer be for us to do, roll over and take it? We won’t do that and we never will, no matter who is running the council.” here it is in black & White so they knew before those elections on what they were going to do. loosehead
  • Score: -2

1:36pm Sun 6 Apr 14

Paramjit Bahia says...

@LooseHead,

Your effort of cutting and pasting the news item from Daily Echo is genuinely apperciated, and your cheek of holding back the detail also admired.

I have the feeling that if you disclose the date on which the news item you have copied was printed, it will turn out to be long time after both Cllr. Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were elected.

Now do the decent thing and accept the fact that you have made a mistake.

All of us sometimes can get sums wrong, but most people tend to accept the fact if they may be wrong. But with your fascination with Tories and UKIP etc driving you to throw imaginary accusations at Don Thomas and Keith Morrell I do not think you will ever change your tune. Although at times even Leader of the Conservative Group Cllr. Smith has paid complements to Don and Keith with whom he does not share political beliefs, you appear to have your unique mud throwing style of your own.

I don't want to be rude but at the moment programme on TV is more interesting and factual. So won't have time to reply to anymore of your fiction.
@LooseHead, Your effort of cutting and pasting the news item from Daily Echo is genuinely apperciated, and your cheek of holding back the detail also admired. I have the feeling that if you disclose the date on which the news item you have copied was printed, it will turn out to be long time after both Cllr. Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were elected. Now do the decent thing and accept the fact that you have made a mistake. All of us sometimes can get sums wrong, but most people tend to accept the fact if they may be wrong. But with your fascination with Tories and UKIP etc driving you to throw imaginary accusations at Don Thomas and Keith Morrell I do not think you will ever change your tune. Although at times even Leader of the Conservative Group Cllr. Smith has paid complements to Don and Keith with whom he does not share political beliefs, you appear to have your unique mud throwing style of your own. I don't want to be rude but at the moment programme on TV is more interesting and factual. So won't have time to reply to anymore of your fiction. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 1

8:46pm Sun 6 Apr 14

loosehead says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
@LooseHead,

Your effort of cutting and pasting the news item from Daily Echo is genuinely apperciated, and your cheek of holding back the detail also admired.

I have the feeling that if you disclose the date on which the news item you have copied was printed, it will turn out to be long time after both Cllr. Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were elected.

Now do the decent thing and accept the fact that you have made a mistake.

All of us sometimes can get sums wrong, but most people tend to accept the fact if they may be wrong. But with your fascination with Tories and UKIP etc driving you to throw imaginary accusations at Don Thomas and Keith Morrell I do not think you will ever change your tune. Although at times even Leader of the Conservative Group Cllr. Smith has paid complements to Don and Keith with whom he does not share political beliefs, you appear to have your unique mud throwing style of your own.

I don't want to be rude but at the moment programme on TV is more interesting and factual. So won't have time to reply to anymore of your fiction.
So insults from a loony leftie a person who supports Southy's TUSC?
The Archive I got this article from was 13th July 2011 so before the local elections when those two had plenty of time to resign their seats & stand as councillors against the cuts but the cowards didn't I wonder why not?
Now I remember why I wouldn't have ever voted for you.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: @LooseHead, Your effort of cutting and pasting the news item from Daily Echo is genuinely apperciated, and your cheek of holding back the detail also admired. I have the feeling that if you disclose the date on which the news item you have copied was printed, it will turn out to be long time after both Cllr. Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were elected. Now do the decent thing and accept the fact that you have made a mistake. All of us sometimes can get sums wrong, but most people tend to accept the fact if they may be wrong. But with your fascination with Tories and UKIP etc driving you to throw imaginary accusations at Don Thomas and Keith Morrell I do not think you will ever change your tune. Although at times even Leader of the Conservative Group Cllr. Smith has paid complements to Don and Keith with whom he does not share political beliefs, you appear to have your unique mud throwing style of your own. I don't want to be rude but at the moment programme on TV is more interesting and factual. So won't have time to reply to anymore of your fiction.[/p][/quote]So insults from a loony leftie a person who supports Southy's TUSC? The Archive I got this article from was 13th July 2011 so before the local elections when those two had plenty of time to resign their seats & stand as councillors against the cuts but the cowards didn't I wonder why not? Now I remember why I wouldn't have ever voted for you. loosehead
  • Score: -2

8:49pm Sun 6 Apr 14

loosehead says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
@LooseHead,

Your effort of cutting and pasting the news item from Daily Echo is genuinely apperciated, and your cheek of holding back the detail also admired.

I have the feeling that if you disclose the date on which the news item you have copied was printed, it will turn out to be long time after both Cllr. Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were elected.

Now do the decent thing and accept the fact that you have made a mistake.

All of us sometimes can get sums wrong, but most people tend to accept the fact if they may be wrong. But with your fascination with Tories and UKIP etc driving you to throw imaginary accusations at Don Thomas and Keith Morrell I do not think you will ever change your tune. Although at times even Leader of the Conservative Group Cllr. Smith has paid complements to Don and Keith with whom he does not share political beliefs, you appear to have your unique mud throwing style of your own.

I don't want to be rude but at the moment programme on TV is more interesting and factual. So won't have time to reply to anymore of your fiction.
maybe instead of your post if you had looked through the Echo archives you would have found this post or is it a case of you already know about it?
Royston is a clever man by praising up these two he's hoping to split Labours vote allowing the Tory candidates to win or didn't that cross your mind?
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: @LooseHead, Your effort of cutting and pasting the news item from Daily Echo is genuinely apperciated, and your cheek of holding back the detail also admired. I have the feeling that if you disclose the date on which the news item you have copied was printed, it will turn out to be long time after both Cllr. Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were elected. Now do the decent thing and accept the fact that you have made a mistake. All of us sometimes can get sums wrong, but most people tend to accept the fact if they may be wrong. But with your fascination with Tories and UKIP etc driving you to throw imaginary accusations at Don Thomas and Keith Morrell I do not think you will ever change your tune. Although at times even Leader of the Conservative Group Cllr. Smith has paid complements to Don and Keith with whom he does not share political beliefs, you appear to have your unique mud throwing style of your own. I don't want to be rude but at the moment programme on TV is more interesting and factual. So won't have time to reply to anymore of your fiction.[/p][/quote]maybe instead of your post if you had looked through the Echo archives you would have found this post or is it a case of you already know about it? Royston is a clever man by praising up these two he's hoping to split Labours vote allowing the Tory candidates to win or didn't that cross your mind? loosehead
  • Score: -1

11:29pm Sun 6 Apr 14

southy says...

lose i can see the one about where the Torys would of cut 100 plus more jobs than labour.
Smithy not clever at all, he knows it will be Keith or it will be a labour he knows that torys don't have a hope in coxford even if the vote splits
lose i can see the one about where the Torys would of cut 100 plus more jobs than labour. Smithy not clever at all, he knows it will be Keith or it will be a labour he knows that torys don't have a hope in coxford even if the vote splits southy
  • Score: -1

3:06am Mon 7 Apr 14

Paramjit Bahia says...

loosehead wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
@LooseHead,

Your effort of cutting and pasting the news item from Daily Echo is genuinely apperciated, and your cheek of holding back the detail also admired.

I have the feeling that if you disclose the date on which the news item you have copied was printed, it will turn out to be long time after both Cllr. Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were elected.

Now do the decent thing and accept the fact that you have made a mistake.

All of us sometimes can get sums wrong, but most people tend to accept the fact if they may be wrong. But with your fascination with Tories and UKIP etc driving you to throw imaginary accusations at Don Thomas and Keith Morrell I do not think you will ever change your tune. Although at times even Leader of the Conservative Group Cllr. Smith has paid complements to Don and Keith with whom he does not share political beliefs, you appear to have your unique mud throwing style of your own.

I don't want to be rude but at the moment programme on TV is more interesting and factual. So won't have time to reply to anymore of your fiction.
So insults from a loony leftie a person who supports Southy's TUSC?
The Archive I got this article from was 13th July 2011 so before the local elections when those two had plenty of time to resign their seats & stand as councillors against the cuts but the cowards didn't I wonder why not?
Now I remember why I wouldn't have ever voted for you.
If you can't understand the difference between statement of an indvidual member of a party and 'Manifesto' on the basis of which political parties contest elections, then it is your own problem.

Even if you want to confuse the difference between any indvidual's statement and a political party's manifesto your mud on Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell won't stick.

Because if Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were already elected members of the Council before that statement was made. You could have blamed them for breaking promises made during their own elections, WHICH THEY HAVE STOOD BY AND ON TOP OF THAT THEY EVEN HAVE DISASSOCIATED WITH NEW LABOUR.

That is why even the leader of Conservative Cllr. Smith, who most certainly does not share Don and Keith's political view, has praised them in the Council for standing with their principles and as far as I am aware Tory Group of Council has never demanded their resignation.

You have every right to be a fiction author, but please don't expect me and those who believe in truth to accept wild imagination of the person who doesn't even know the difference between manifesto and statement of an indvidual to be taken seriously.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: @LooseHead, Your effort of cutting and pasting the news item from Daily Echo is genuinely apperciated, and your cheek of holding back the detail also admired. I have the feeling that if you disclose the date on which the news item you have copied was printed, it will turn out to be long time after both Cllr. Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were elected. Now do the decent thing and accept the fact that you have made a mistake. All of us sometimes can get sums wrong, but most people tend to accept the fact if they may be wrong. But with your fascination with Tories and UKIP etc driving you to throw imaginary accusations at Don Thomas and Keith Morrell I do not think you will ever change your tune. Although at times even Leader of the Conservative Group Cllr. Smith has paid complements to Don and Keith with whom he does not share political beliefs, you appear to have your unique mud throwing style of your own. I don't want to be rude but at the moment programme on TV is more interesting and factual. So won't have time to reply to anymore of your fiction.[/p][/quote]So insults from a loony leftie a person who supports Southy's TUSC? The Archive I got this article from was 13th July 2011 so before the local elections when those two had plenty of time to resign their seats & stand as councillors against the cuts but the cowards didn't I wonder why not? Now I remember why I wouldn't have ever voted for you.[/p][/quote]If you can't understand the difference between statement of an indvidual member of a party and 'Manifesto' on the basis of which political parties contest elections, then it is your own problem. Even if you want to confuse the difference between any indvidual's statement and a political party's manifesto your mud on Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell won't stick. Because if Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were already elected members of the Council before that statement was made. You could have blamed them for breaking promises made during their own elections, WHICH THEY HAVE STOOD BY AND ON TOP OF THAT THEY EVEN HAVE DISASSOCIATED WITH NEW LABOUR. That is why even the leader of Conservative Cllr. Smith, who most certainly does not share Don and Keith's political view, has praised them in the Council for standing with their principles and as far as I am aware Tory Group of Council has never demanded their resignation. You have every right to be a fiction author, but please don't expect me and those who believe in truth to accept wild imagination of the person who doesn't even know the difference between manifesto and statement of an indvidual to be taken seriously. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 2

6:10am Mon 7 Apr 14

loosehead says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
@LooseHead,

Your effort of cutting and pasting the news item from Daily Echo is genuinely apperciated, and your cheek of holding back the detail also admired.

I have the feeling that if you disclose the date on which the news item you have copied was printed, it will turn out to be long time after both Cllr. Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were elected.

Now do the decent thing and accept the fact that you have made a mistake.

All of us sometimes can get sums wrong, but most people tend to accept the fact if they may be wrong. But with your fascination with Tories and UKIP etc driving you to throw imaginary accusations at Don Thomas and Keith Morrell I do not think you will ever change your tune. Although at times even Leader of the Conservative Group Cllr. Smith has paid complements to Don and Keith with whom he does not share political beliefs, you appear to have your unique mud throwing style of your own.

I don't want to be rude but at the moment programme on TV is more interesting and factual. So won't have time to reply to anymore of your fiction.
So insults from a loony leftie a person who supports Southy's TUSC?
The Archive I got this article from was 13th July 2011 so before the local elections when those two had plenty of time to resign their seats & stand as councillors against the cuts but the cowards didn't I wonder why not?
Now I remember why I wouldn't have ever voted for you.
If you can't understand the difference between statement of an indvidual member of a party and 'Manifesto' on the basis of which political parties contest elections, then it is your own problem.

Even if you want to confuse the difference between any indvidual's statement and a political party's manifesto your mud on Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell won't stick.

Because if Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were already elected members of the Council before that statement was made. You could have blamed them for breaking promises made during their own elections, WHICH THEY HAVE STOOD BY AND ON TOP OF THAT THEY EVEN HAVE DISASSOCIATED WITH NEW LABOUR.

That is why even the leader of Conservative Cllr. Smith, who most certainly does not share Don and Keith's political view, has praised them in the Council for standing with their principles and as far as I am aware Tory Group of Council has never demanded their resignation.

You have every right to be a fiction author, but please don't expect me and those who believe in truth to accept wild imagination of the person who doesn't even know the difference between manifesto and statement of an indvidual to be taken seriously.
So you think the sun shines out of their rears! I believe in principals & if the LEADER of your party wether if an elected councillor or candidate you can't accept what he/she says then do the right thing & resign & fight your case not stay or get elected as a member of that party & then break away.
Are you really trying to tell me that the Leader of the Labour Party comes out with those cuts & it's just his policies not Labours?
He put it right out there so your two cowards knew before those elections exactly what Labour were about so why is it a guy who is usually fair in his posts seem to think these two can do no wrong?
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: @LooseHead, Your effort of cutting and pasting the news item from Daily Echo is genuinely apperciated, and your cheek of holding back the detail also admired. I have the feeling that if you disclose the date on which the news item you have copied was printed, it will turn out to be long time after both Cllr. Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were elected. Now do the decent thing and accept the fact that you have made a mistake. All of us sometimes can get sums wrong, but most people tend to accept the fact if they may be wrong. But with your fascination with Tories and UKIP etc driving you to throw imaginary accusations at Don Thomas and Keith Morrell I do not think you will ever change your tune. Although at times even Leader of the Conservative Group Cllr. Smith has paid complements to Don and Keith with whom he does not share political beliefs, you appear to have your unique mud throwing style of your own. I don't want to be rude but at the moment programme on TV is more interesting and factual. So won't have time to reply to anymore of your fiction.[/p][/quote]So insults from a loony leftie a person who supports Southy's TUSC? The Archive I got this article from was 13th July 2011 so before the local elections when those two had plenty of time to resign their seats & stand as councillors against the cuts but the cowards didn't I wonder why not? Now I remember why I wouldn't have ever voted for you.[/p][/quote]If you can't understand the difference between statement of an indvidual member of a party and 'Manifesto' on the basis of which political parties contest elections, then it is your own problem. Even if you want to confuse the difference between any indvidual's statement and a political party's manifesto your mud on Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell won't stick. Because if Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were already elected members of the Council before that statement was made. You could have blamed them for breaking promises made during their own elections, WHICH THEY HAVE STOOD BY AND ON TOP OF THAT THEY EVEN HAVE DISASSOCIATED WITH NEW LABOUR. That is why even the leader of Conservative Cllr. Smith, who most certainly does not share Don and Keith's political view, has praised them in the Council for standing with their principles and as far as I am aware Tory Group of Council has never demanded their resignation. You have every right to be a fiction author, but please don't expect me and those who believe in truth to accept wild imagination of the person who doesn't even know the difference between manifesto and statement of an indvidual to be taken seriously.[/p][/quote]So you think the sun shines out of their rears! I believe in principals & if the LEADER of your party wether if an elected councillor or candidate you can't accept what he/she says then do the right thing & resign & fight your case not stay or get elected as a member of that party & then break away. Are you really trying to tell me that the Leader of the Labour Party comes out with those cuts & it's just his policies not Labours? He put it right out there so your two cowards knew before those elections exactly what Labour were about so why is it a guy who is usually fair in his posts seem to think these two can do no wrong? loosehead
  • Score: 0

7:25am Mon 7 Apr 14

aldermoorboy says...

Loosehead 10-0 Lett wingers.

As a Saints support Loosehead I wish you were a footballer who play for Saints.
Saints would win the league with your work rate, detailed research and honesty, well done.
Loosehead 10-0 Lett wingers. As a Saints support Loosehead I wish you were a footballer who play for Saints. Saints would win the league with your work rate, detailed research and honesty, well done. aldermoorboy
  • Score: 0

6:07pm Mon 7 Apr 14

southy says...

loosehead wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
@LooseHead,

Your effort of cutting and pasting the news item from Daily Echo is genuinely apperciated, and your cheek of holding back the detail also admired.

I have the feeling that if you disclose the date on which the news item you have copied was printed, it will turn out to be long time after both Cllr. Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were elected.

Now do the decent thing and accept the fact that you have made a mistake.

All of us sometimes can get sums wrong, but most people tend to accept the fact if they may be wrong. But with your fascination with Tories and UKIP etc driving you to throw imaginary accusations at Don Thomas and Keith Morrell I do not think you will ever change your tune. Although at times even Leader of the Conservative Group Cllr. Smith has paid complements to Don and Keith with whom he does not share political beliefs, you appear to have your unique mud throwing style of your own.

I don't want to be rude but at the moment programme on TV is more interesting and factual. So won't have time to reply to anymore of your fiction.
So insults from a loony leftie a person who supports Southy's TUSC?
The Archive I got this article from was 13th July 2011 so before the local elections when those two had plenty of time to resign their seats & stand as councillors against the cuts but the cowards didn't I wonder why not?
Now I remember why I wouldn't have ever voted for you.
If you can't understand the difference between statement of an indvidual member of a party and 'Manifesto' on the basis of which political parties contest elections, then it is your own problem.

Even if you want to confuse the difference between any indvidual's statement and a political party's manifesto your mud on Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell won't stick.

Because if Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were already elected members of the Council before that statement was made. You could have blamed them for breaking promises made during their own elections, WHICH THEY HAVE STOOD BY AND ON TOP OF THAT THEY EVEN HAVE DISASSOCIATED WITH NEW LABOUR.

That is why even the leader of Conservative Cllr. Smith, who most certainly does not share Don and Keith's political view, has praised them in the Council for standing with their principles and as far as I am aware Tory Group of Council has never demanded their resignation.

You have every right to be a fiction author, but please don't expect me and those who believe in truth to accept wild imagination of the person who doesn't even know the difference between manifesto and statement of an indvidual to be taken seriously.
So you think the sun shines out of their rears! I believe in principals & if the LEADER of your party wether if an elected councillor or candidate you can't accept what he/she says then do the right thing & resign & fight your case not stay or get elected as a member of that party & then break away.
Are you really trying to tell me that the Leader of the Labour Party comes out with those cuts & it's just his policies not Labours?
He put it right out there so your two cowards knew before those elections exactly what Labour were about so why is it a guy who is usually fair in his posts seem to think these two can do no wrong?
Loose what Paramjit is trying to tell you is this.
1/ Sally Spicer was elected in office on the May 3rd 2012 elections under Labour term office for that year. not due to be reelected till May 2016
2/ Don Thomas was elected into office on 6th May 2011, A year before Labour took control of the Council, due for reelected in May next year 2015
3/ Keith Morrell elected into office on 6th May 2011, reelection this year on 22nd May, 2 years before Labour took control of the council.
And each of those years the term of office is diffferent,, Don and Keith done what they was elected in to do, represent the people of there ward
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: @LooseHead, Your effort of cutting and pasting the news item from Daily Echo is genuinely apperciated, and your cheek of holding back the detail also admired. I have the feeling that if you disclose the date on which the news item you have copied was printed, it will turn out to be long time after both Cllr. Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were elected. Now do the decent thing and accept the fact that you have made a mistake. All of us sometimes can get sums wrong, but most people tend to accept the fact if they may be wrong. But with your fascination with Tories and UKIP etc driving you to throw imaginary accusations at Don Thomas and Keith Morrell I do not think you will ever change your tune. Although at times even Leader of the Conservative Group Cllr. Smith has paid complements to Don and Keith with whom he does not share political beliefs, you appear to have your unique mud throwing style of your own. I don't want to be rude but at the moment programme on TV is more interesting and factual. So won't have time to reply to anymore of your fiction.[/p][/quote]So insults from a loony leftie a person who supports Southy's TUSC? The Archive I got this article from was 13th July 2011 so before the local elections when those two had plenty of time to resign their seats & stand as councillors against the cuts but the cowards didn't I wonder why not? Now I remember why I wouldn't have ever voted for you.[/p][/quote]If you can't understand the difference between statement of an indvidual member of a party and 'Manifesto' on the basis of which political parties contest elections, then it is your own problem. Even if you want to confuse the difference between any indvidual's statement and a political party's manifesto your mud on Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell won't stick. Because if Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were already elected members of the Council before that statement was made. You could have blamed them for breaking promises made during their own elections, WHICH THEY HAVE STOOD BY AND ON TOP OF THAT THEY EVEN HAVE DISASSOCIATED WITH NEW LABOUR. That is why even the leader of Conservative Cllr. Smith, who most certainly does not share Don and Keith's political view, has praised them in the Council for standing with their principles and as far as I am aware Tory Group of Council has never demanded their resignation. You have every right to be a fiction author, but please don't expect me and those who believe in truth to accept wild imagination of the person who doesn't even know the difference between manifesto and statement of an indvidual to be taken seriously.[/p][/quote]So you think the sun shines out of their rears! I believe in principals & if the LEADER of your party wether if an elected councillor or candidate you can't accept what he/she says then do the right thing & resign & fight your case not stay or get elected as a member of that party & then break away. Are you really trying to tell me that the Leader of the Labour Party comes out with those cuts & it's just his policies not Labours? He put it right out there so your two cowards knew before those elections exactly what Labour were about so why is it a guy who is usually fair in his posts seem to think these two can do no wrong?[/p][/quote]Loose what Paramjit is trying to tell you is this. 1/ Sally Spicer was elected in office on the May 3rd 2012 elections under Labour term office for that year. not due to be reelected till May 2016 2/ Don Thomas was elected into office on 6th May 2011, A year before Labour took control of the Council, due for reelected in May next year 2015 3/ Keith Morrell elected into office on 6th May 2011, reelection this year on 22nd May, 2 years before Labour took control of the council. And each of those years the term of office is diffferent,, Don and Keith done what they was elected in to do, represent the people of there ward southy
  • Score: 0

9:19pm Mon 7 Apr 14

loosehead says...

southy wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
@LooseHead,

Your effort of cutting and pasting the news item from Daily Echo is genuinely apperciated, and your cheek of holding back the detail also admired.

I have the feeling that if you disclose the date on which the news item you have copied was printed, it will turn out to be long time after both Cllr. Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were elected.

Now do the decent thing and accept the fact that you have made a mistake.

All of us sometimes can get sums wrong, but most people tend to accept the fact if they may be wrong. But with your fascination with Tories and UKIP etc driving you to throw imaginary accusations at Don Thomas and Keith Morrell I do not think you will ever change your tune. Although at times even Leader of the Conservative Group Cllr. Smith has paid complements to Don and Keith with whom he does not share political beliefs, you appear to have your unique mud throwing style of your own.

I don't want to be rude but at the moment programme on TV is more interesting and factual. So won't have time to reply to anymore of your fiction.
So insults from a loony leftie a person who supports Southy's TUSC?
The Archive I got this article from was 13th July 2011 so before the local elections when those two had plenty of time to resign their seats & stand as councillors against the cuts but the cowards didn't I wonder why not?
Now I remember why I wouldn't have ever voted for you.
If you can't understand the difference between statement of an indvidual member of a party and 'Manifesto' on the basis of which political parties contest elections, then it is your own problem.

Even if you want to confuse the difference between any indvidual's statement and a political party's manifesto your mud on Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell won't stick.

Because if Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were already elected members of the Council before that statement was made. You could have blamed them for breaking promises made during their own elections, WHICH THEY HAVE STOOD BY AND ON TOP OF THAT THEY EVEN HAVE DISASSOCIATED WITH NEW LABOUR.

That is why even the leader of Conservative Cllr. Smith, who most certainly does not share Don and Keith's political view, has praised them in the Council for standing with their principles and as far as I am aware Tory Group of Council has never demanded their resignation.

You have every right to be a fiction author, but please don't expect me and those who believe in truth to accept wild imagination of the person who doesn't even know the difference between manifesto and statement of an indvidual to be taken seriously.
So you think the sun shines out of their rears! I believe in principals & if the LEADER of your party wether if an elected councillor or candidate you can't accept what he/she says then do the right thing & resign & fight your case not stay or get elected as a member of that party & then break away.
Are you really trying to tell me that the Leader of the Labour Party comes out with those cuts & it's just his policies not Labours?
He put it right out there so your two cowards knew before those elections exactly what Labour were about so why is it a guy who is usually fair in his posts seem to think these two can do no wrong?
Loose what Paramjit is trying to tell you is this.
1/ Sally Spicer was elected in office on the May 3rd 2012 elections under Labour term office for that year. not due to be reelected till May 2016
2/ Don Thomas was elected into office on 6th May 2011, A year before Labour took control of the Council, due for reelected in May next year 2015
3/ Keith Morrell elected into office on 6th May 2011, reelection this year on 22nd May, 2 years before Labour took control of the council.
And each of those years the term of office is diffferent,, Don and Keith done what they was elected in to do, represent the people of there ward
Southy so Williams let it be known in the July after those two were elected what cuts Labour had planned.
So why didn't they resign & force a election on their wards & stand as a party against cuts?
You have come on here time & time again saying stop the cuts so would you stay in a Party that was going to make cuts on the scale Labour were going to make cuts?
If these two had principles they would have stood down,broke away from Labour before Labour won control they would have shouted from the rooftops what Labour had planned but they didn't they waited until the pool was going to be4 shut & they looked as if they could lose their seats.
Southy did they vote with the Tories in the NO confidence vote or did they vote with Labour?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: @LooseHead, Your effort of cutting and pasting the news item from Daily Echo is genuinely apperciated, and your cheek of holding back the detail also admired. I have the feeling that if you disclose the date on which the news item you have copied was printed, it will turn out to be long time after both Cllr. Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were elected. Now do the decent thing and accept the fact that you have made a mistake. All of us sometimes can get sums wrong, but most people tend to accept the fact if they may be wrong. But with your fascination with Tories and UKIP etc driving you to throw imaginary accusations at Don Thomas and Keith Morrell I do not think you will ever change your tune. Although at times even Leader of the Conservative Group Cllr. Smith has paid complements to Don and Keith with whom he does not share political beliefs, you appear to have your unique mud throwing style of your own. I don't want to be rude but at the moment programme on TV is more interesting and factual. So won't have time to reply to anymore of your fiction.[/p][/quote]So insults from a loony leftie a person who supports Southy's TUSC? The Archive I got this article from was 13th July 2011 so before the local elections when those two had plenty of time to resign their seats & stand as councillors against the cuts but the cowards didn't I wonder why not? Now I remember why I wouldn't have ever voted for you.[/p][/quote]If you can't understand the difference between statement of an indvidual member of a party and 'Manifesto' on the basis of which political parties contest elections, then it is your own problem. Even if you want to confuse the difference between any indvidual's statement and a political party's manifesto your mud on Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell won't stick. Because if Don Thomas and Keith Morrell were already elected members of the Council before that statement was made. You could have blamed them for breaking promises made during their own elections, WHICH THEY HAVE STOOD BY AND ON TOP OF THAT THEY EVEN HAVE DISASSOCIATED WITH NEW LABOUR. That is why even the leader of Conservative Cllr. Smith, who most certainly does not share Don and Keith's political view, has praised them in the Council for standing with their principles and as far as I am aware Tory Group of Council has never demanded their resignation. You have every right to be a fiction author, but please don't expect me and those who believe in truth to accept wild imagination of the person who doesn't even know the difference between manifesto and statement of an indvidual to be taken seriously.[/p][/quote]So you think the sun shines out of their rears! I believe in principals & if the LEADER of your party wether if an elected councillor or candidate you can't accept what he/she says then do the right thing & resign & fight your case not stay or get elected as a member of that party & then break away. Are you really trying to tell me that the Leader of the Labour Party comes out with those cuts & it's just his policies not Labours? He put it right out there so your two cowards knew before those elections exactly what Labour were about so why is it a guy who is usually fair in his posts seem to think these two can do no wrong?[/p][/quote]Loose what Paramjit is trying to tell you is this. 1/ Sally Spicer was elected in office on the May 3rd 2012 elections under Labour term office for that year. not due to be reelected till May 2016 2/ Don Thomas was elected into office on 6th May 2011, A year before Labour took control of the Council, due for reelected in May next year 2015 3/ Keith Morrell elected into office on 6th May 2011, reelection this year on 22nd May, 2 years before Labour took control of the council. And each of those years the term of office is diffferent,, Don and Keith done what they was elected in to do, represent the people of there ward[/p][/quote]Southy so Williams let it be known in the July after those two were elected what cuts Labour had planned. So why didn't they resign & force a election on their wards & stand as a party against cuts? You have come on here time & time again saying stop the cuts so would you stay in a Party that was going to make cuts on the scale Labour were going to make cuts? If these two had principles they would have stood down,broke away from Labour before Labour won control they would have shouted from the rooftops what Labour had planned but they didn't they waited until the pool was going to be4 shut & they looked as if they could lose their seats. Southy did they vote with the Tories in the NO confidence vote or did they vote with Labour? loosehead
  • Score: 0

11:06pm Mon 7 Apr 14

southy says...

1 thing they was half way though there term of office, its rare with councillors to call an early ward election, its normal only called early if the councillor can no longer do the job
1 thing they was half way though there term of office, its rare with councillors to call an early ward election, its normal only called early if the councillor can no longer do the job southy
  • Score: -1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree